Scamming The System: Unraveling Latabai Jadhav's Complex Network Of Fake Maintenance Claims And False Identities

The Bombay High Court's Aurangabad bench denied bail to a woman who was accused of fabricating maintenance claims against men and then withdrawing them following Out-Of-Court agreements. The accused Latabai Jadhav and two of her attorneys were the targets of a complaint filed at the Silod City police station in the Aurangabad district of Maharashtra. Jadhav has already had his bail request denied by the Sessions Court and the magistrate on the grounds that it would delay the trial.

"Even though the trial has been a little delayed and the Trial Court was expecting a speedy trial, the reasons for not exercising the discretion recorded by both Courts appears to be correct, legal, and proper," Justice S.G. Mehare bench stated in rejecting the bail application.

The applicant's past is not good. Thus, it is likewise reasonable to be concerned that she might disappear. Judge Mehare noted that the Trial Court seemed to be making every effort to wrap up the case as soon as possible, even though she denied Jadhav's request for release. However, the Presiding Officer frequently has little authority over a great deal of things. It is a collaborative effort. The Court should have the backing of all involved parties in order to wrap up the trial in a fair amount of time.

The case was made public when a man petitioned the high court to have a suit against him by Jadhav for maintenance of Rs 25,000 dismissed. The individual stated that he had never met Jadhav and that he had discovered through his own research that Jadhav and her two attorneys had filed three more cases of this kind under fictitious identities. The man informed the High Court that two of these cases had Out-Of-Court settlements, following which the cases were dropped. But in each of these instances, the tale was the same. The man had pleaded, and the Judge had ordered the police to look into the instances.

The Court came to the conclusion that the advocates were conspiring with the woman and filed fictitious procedures, which were later withdrawn as a result of Out-Of-Court settlements, after obtaining the report. The Sillod City police were subsequently ordered by the Court to file a First Information Report (FIR) against attorneys Ashok Tayade, Buddhabhushan Dandge, and Jadhav.

On October 15, 2023, the police produced a chargesheet in which Jadhav was depicted as an accused who was evading capture. This year, she was only
taken into custody on January 30. Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy), Section 182 (resistance to the removal of property by the legitimate power of a public official), Section 193 (false evidence), Sections 419 (impersonation), 420 (cheating), and 468 (forgery) together with Section 34 (common intention) of the IPC were the charges brought against Jadhav and his associates. In this instance, there are just two witnesses left to give testimony.

Author:
Aarya Kadam (News Writer) is a final-year BBA student and a creative writer with a passion for current affairs and legal Judgments.