Sessions court denies pre-arrest bail to BARC officer accused of duping jobseeker of ₹64 lakh

A government servant at BARC, Trombay, has been denied anticipatory bail after being accused of duping jobseekers of ₹64 lakh.

MUMBAI: The sessions court recently denied the anticipatory bail application of a 56-year-old government servant working at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Trombay, who has been accused of misusing his position and duping jobseeker of ₹64 lakh.

HT Image

“It is well settled that socio-economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. Usually, a socio-economic offence has deep-rooted conspiracies affecting the moral fibre of the society and causing irreparable harm, hence, needs to be considered seriously,” observed the court, while rejecting the pre-arrest bail plea of Subhashchand Katoch.

According to the prosecution, the accused, Katoch, in July 2023, assured the complainant Raja Karale and other unemployed youngsters that he will provide them jobs in BARC and the Railway. Happy and satisfied by his promises, Karale, like others, was ready to pay him the amount he demanded.

It was the contention of the complainant that Katoch took ₹64 lakh from him and his relatives. While taking the money, he assured them that they would receive appointment letters soon. However, the complainant claimed to have not received any appointment letter even after five months of the said application. Subsequently, when Karale was unable to get any clarification on the matter from Katoch, he approached the Trombay Police Station and filed a complaint against the accused.

Katoch was asked to attend the police station on July 2, 2023; however, it was later realized in the reply of the investigating officer that there was no crime registered against Katoch yet, which the court termed as another ground for rejecting his pre-arrest bail.

“In my view, since crime is not registered against the accused, there is no apprehension of the arrest of the accused. Therefore, he cannot be granted anticipatory bail. In addition to that custodial interrogation of the accused is necessary. Considering the nature of the offence and role played by the accused, I am of the view that the accused is not entitled for anticipatory bail,” said additional sessions judge A S Salgar.