All Anticipatory Bail Application

Order - Status 5: Ladda IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION No. 873 of 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe .. Applicant. Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. H.P. Ingle I/by Mr. Prashant Goyal Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the State. CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J. DATE : 15th May, 2017. (VACATION JUDGE) P.C. The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with investigation of Crime No. 8 of 2017 registered with Meghwadi Police Station, Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai under Section 406, 420 of IPC. On hearing the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP, it appears that earlier there was First Information Report (FIR) lodged by Abhishek Rai on 6th November, 2016 bearing Crime No. 288 of 2016 registered with Police Station, Vanrai, Mumbai on similar allegations in which the applicant had approached this Court by filing ABA No. 288 of 2017. This Court on 5th May, 2017 has granted interim protection to the applicant on certain conditions. A perusal of the First Information Report in the present case would show that the allegations by and large are similar. The FIR was lodged by Mr. Rohit Sonik. The applicant is alleged to have committed misappropriation and breach of trust in respect of mobile handsets worth Rs.2,01,666/-. Considering the fact that in respect of similar allegations this Court had granted interim protection, the following order is passed: (i) By way of an interim relief, it is directed that in the event of arrest in connection with investigation of Crime No. 8 of 2017, Meghwadi Police Station, the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount; (ii) The applicant shall attend the Investigating Officer on Monday and Friday between 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. and as and when required by the Investigating Officer; and (iii) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency and shall not tamper or influence the prosecution witnesses. Stand over to 8th June, 2017. (C.V. BHADANG,J)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.873/2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe Applicant vs State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Hemant Ingle i.b Mr.Prashant Goyal for Applicant Mr.A.R.Kapadnis APP for State CORAM : PRAKASH D.NAIK, J. DATE : 8 JUNE 2017 P.C. By an order dated 15.5.2017 interim protection was granted to the Applicant. The Applicant was directed to attend the police station. The Advocate for the Applicant submitted that he has complied with the said directions. The learned APP submitted that the Investigating Officer is not present and he would like to take instructions in the matter. In view of the said circumstances, stand over to 28.6.2017. Ad interim order granted earlier to continue till then. (PRAKASH D.NAIK, J)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 …... …... Aditya Dilip Bagwe .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Prashant Goyel, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.A.R.Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent – State. P.I. More, Meghwadi Police Station, present. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : JUNE 28, 2017. P.C. : The applicant was granted interim protection vide order dated 15th May, 2017. There was a condition to attend the investigating officer on Monday and Friday. Learned APP on instructions submits that the applicant has not complied with the condition of reporting. It is further submitted that the applicant has given false address and he was not traceable at the given address. Learned advocate for the applicant seeks time to take instruction. Hence, stand over to 7th July, 2017. 2 Interim relief granted earlier to continue till then. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent …... Mr.Prashant Goyal, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.A.R. Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : JULY 25, 2017. …... P.C. : Stand over to 7th August, 2017. 2 This matter to be heard along with Anticipatory Bail Application No.288 of 2017. 3 Interim relief granted earlier to continue till then. 4 The applicant shall attend Meghwadi Police Station, Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai, on Saturday 29th July, 2017 between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 670 OF 2017 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Ahishek Rai ...Intervener IN THE MATTER BETWEEN : Aditya Dilip Bagwe ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Prashant Goyal for the Applicant Mr. Ajay Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent-State Mr. S. C. Singh for the Intervener CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. MONDAY, 7th AUGUST, 2017 P.C. : Learned Counsel for the applicant to furnish a copy of the application being Criminal Application No. 288 of 2017 on the learned Counsel for the intervener on or before 11th August, 2017. Stand over to 16th August, 2017. Interim protection to continue till the next date. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 18th August, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time stand over to 07/09/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 7th September, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time stand over to 25/09/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 25th September, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time stand over to 12/10/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe …Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICTION NO.670 OF 2017 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Abhishek Rai Intervener. In the matter between Aditya Dilip Bagwe Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. Respondents Mr. Shrinivas Singh i/b S.I.Singh for Intervener Mr.Hemant Ingale i/b Prashant Goyal for the applicant Ms.P.P.Shinde, APP for the State CORAM: A.M. BADAR, J. DATED: 12th OCTOBER, 2017 PC: Mr. Shrinivas Singh appears for the Intervener. At the request of the parties stand over to 16th November 2017. In the meanwhile interim order to continue. (A.M. BADAR, J )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : A.M. BADAR, J DATE : 16th November, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 11/12/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 WITH APPP NO. 670 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra . … Respondent Mr. Hemant Ingle i/b Prashant Goyal for Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for State. Mr. Nitin Dalvi for Intervener. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 16th JANUARY 2018. P.C.: 1] At the request of learned Counsel for the applicant, stand over to 23rd January 2018. Interim relief to continue till then. (A.S.GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 29: Nalawade IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.670 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ..Applicant. vs. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent. Mr. Sugat i/by Prashant Goyal for the Applicant in ABA No.873/2017 and ABA No.288/2017. Mr.Nitin Dalvi i/by Shweta Singh for the Applicant in APPP No.670/2017. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP. for the State. CORAM: A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 6th February, 2018. P.C. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Advocate on record is not keeping well and is unable to attend the Court today. At his request, S.O. to 20.2.2018. Interim relief to continue till then. (A.S.GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 31: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ..Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. T.N. Khandare i/b Prashant Goyal for Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for State. Mr. Nitin Dalvi for Original Complainant. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 20th FEBRUARY 2018. P.C.: 1] Applicant is directed to attend the Investigating Officer from 22nd February 2018 to 25th February 2018 between 10.00 a.m to 2.00 p.m and to join in the process of investigation. 2] Stand over to 1st March 2018. Interim relief to continue till then. (A.S.GADKARI, J.) 1/1

Order - Status 32: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ..Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. T.N. Khandare i/b Prashant Goyal for Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for State. Mr. Nitin Dalvi for Original Complainant. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 20th FEBRUARY 2018. P.C.: 1] Applicant is directed to attend the Investigating Officer from 22nd February 2018 to 25th February 2018 between 10.00 a.m to 2.00 p.m and to join in the process of investigation. 2] Stand over to 1st March 2018. Interim relief to continue till then. (A.S.GADKARI, J.) 1/1

Order - Status 34: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 23rd March, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 02/04/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 36: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 2nd April, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 17/04/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 38: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 17th April, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 26/04/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 40: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 26th April, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 06/06/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 42: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 288 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagwe ….Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra ….Respondent. Mr. Sugat Ingale i/by Hemant Ingale for the Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar APP, for the RespondentState. Mr. Nitin Dalvi for the intervenor. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 25th JUNE, 2018. P.C.: It is submitted that the Advocate on record is in personal difficulty and is unable to attend the Court today. 2 At the request of the learned counsel, stand over to 11th July, 2018 for hearing. (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 46: Santosh IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 873 OF 2017 Aditya Dilip Bagve Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Mr. Prashant Goyal, for the Applicant. Mr. Ameet Palkar, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM: A. S. GADKARI, J DATED: 11th JULY, 2018 PC: 1. By an order dated dated 15th May, 2017, the applicant was granted interim relief. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP. Perused the record of investigation. The first information report is lodged by Mr. Rohit Sonik on 7th January, 2017. 2. It is the precise prosecution case against the applicant that, the applicant after gaining confidence of the first informant, took delivery of handsets/mobile phones of Vivo company amounting to Rs.2,01,666/ for sale and thereafter neither returned the said handsets nor paid the 1/3 4-ABA873-17.DOC consideration for the same. That the applicant thereafter did not contact to the first informant. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that this is pure and simple civil transaction. He submitted that the applicant has already repaid the amount to the first informant. He submitted that Mr. Rajesh Singh, the partner of Abhishek Rai had been to his shop for collecting the cash towards sale of mobile phones and as the applicant was unable to repay the amount to Mr. Rajesh Singh, he took away all the mobile phones, which were kept for display in the shop. He further submitted that the applicant did not have the said mobile phones as the same have been forcibly taken away by Mr. Rajesh Singh and therefore the applicant could not return the said handsets to the first informant. He, therefore, prayed that the applicant may be granted the prearrest bail. 4. The record of investigation indicates that apart from the first informant herein, there are other five other victims in the present crime, who have been cheated by the applicant by adopting similar modus operendi to the tune of 2/3 approximately Rs.21,07,000/ (Rs. Twenty one lakhs seven thousand only). This Court by an order dated 11th July, 2018 has rejected Anticipatory Bail Application No. 288 of 2017 preferred by the applicant in CR No.288 of 2016 registered with Vanrai police station, Mumbai wherein also similar modus operendi was adopted by the applicant. 5. After taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, the serious allegations against the applicant and the gravity of the offence, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant does not deserve to be protected by prearrest bail. 6. The application is accordingly rejected. [A. S. GADKARI, J.] Santosh Subhash Kulkarni Digitally signed by Santosh Subhash Kulkarni Date: 2018.07.16 11:16:06 +0530

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam And Ors ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr.Balkrishna D Joshi For Applicant Mrs.P.P. Shinde - APP for State CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 5th January, 2018 P.C. : Learned APP waives service and seeks time to take instructions. Time as prayed for is granted. Stand over to 10/01/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam And Ors ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr.Balkrishna D Joshi For Applicant Ms.Veera Shinde - APP for State CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 10th January, 2018 P.C. : Stand over to 29/01/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 01 OF 2018 Shri Vijay Ramdas Nikam & Ors. Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Virendra Pethe i/b Mr. Balkrishna D. Joshi, for the applicant. Mr. S.R.Agarkar,APP, for the State. CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV, J. DATE : 22nd January, 2018. P.C. : It is submitted that the applicant No.2 has been detected with malignant tumor. The report of Tata Memorial Centre dated 4.1.2018 indicates that the liver lesio biopsy was taken. Biopsy shows high grade malignant tumor. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that he would give the photocopies of the report to the learned APP during the course of the day. The learned APP to take instructions to that effect. The matter to be listed on 29.1.2018. (SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.)

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam And Ors ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr.Balkrishna Joshi for Applicant Ms.Veera Shinde - APP for State CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 29th January, 2018 P.C. : Stand over to 07/02/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam And Ors ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 7th February, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Stand over to 12/02/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam And Ors ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SMT. S.S. JADHAV, J DATE : 12th February, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Stand over to 27/02/2018. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam And Ors ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH, J DATE : 27th February, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 05/03/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: Sarnobat IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 01 OF 2018 Shri Vijay Ramdas Nikam & Ors.... Applicants.Vs.... Respondent. WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 03 OF 2018. Vijay Pundalik Patil. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. .. Applicant. .. Respondent. Mr. Balkrishna D. Joshi for the Applicants in ABA No. 01/18. Mr. Anoop U. Patil, for the Applicant in ABA No. 03/18. Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent/State. $frac{text{CORAM}}{text{DATE}} : underline{P. N. DESHMUKH, J.}$ P. C. : Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that as per telephonic instructions, applicant No. 1 is arrested on 1 st March, 2018. Learned counsel for applicants is not aware of the said fact. Learned counsel for applicant No. 3 submits that applicant has provided his bank accounts with the Investigating Officer and that applicant No. 2 is not arrested in view of oral directions of this Court being a Cancer patient. This statement is also made by Additional (13(14)ABA118 ABA318 Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for the applicant in ABA No. 03/2018 submits that as per oral directions of this Court, applicant has submitted his accounts and that his bank accounts are freezed and therefore, submits that applicant be protected by interim protection. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor seeks time for want of instructions as I.O. is not present. Record reveals that notice is issued to Respondent on 5th January, 2018 and time was granted to file affidavit in reply which was further extended on 10th January, 2018 and 29th January, 2018 and thereafter on three occasions, application came to be adjourned for want of time. In these circumstances, as further time is granted to file affidavit in reply, following order is passed. ORDER (i) In the event of arrest of applicant Nos. 1 and 3 in ABA No.01/2018 and applicant in ABA No. 03/2018, in Crime No. 396/2017 registered with Sarkarwada Police Station, Nasik, they shall be released on bail on their executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety in the like amount. (ii) The above applicants shall attend Investigating Officer for a period of one week from 8th March, 2018. 2/3 (13(14)ABA118 ABA318 (iii) ABA No. 03/2018 be heard along with this application. (iv) Stand over to 19th March, 2018. [ P. N. DESHMUKH , J.]

Order - Status 21: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION No. 1 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam & Ors. … Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION No. 3 OF 2018 Vijay Pundalik Patil … Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent *** Mr. Virendra Pethe i/b Balkrishna D. Joshi, for the Applicants in ABA. 1/2018. Mr. Anoop Patil, for Applicant in ABA. 3/2018. *** Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : P. N. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : MARCH 19, 2018 PC :- . Learned counsel for Applicants submits that Applicant / accused No.1 in ABA No. 1/2018 was arrested on 1st March, 2018. Learned counsel further submits that Applicant No. 3 for want of knowledge of order dated 5th March, 2018 since not communicated by his counsel has not attended investigating officer for a period of one week from 8th March, 2018. None appears for Applicant No. 1 in ABA. No. 3/2018. Applicant No. 3 in ABA. No. 1/2018 to attend Investigating Officer for a period of one week and shall co-operate with the investigation. S. O. to 2nd April, 2018. Interim order to continue till next date.

Order - Status 23: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTI.BAIL APPLICATION NO.01 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam 2. Anil Navnath Shinde 3. Sarangdhar Yadav Pansare .. Applicants Vs. State of Maharashtra ... Respondent with ANTI.BAIL APPLICATION NO.03 OF 2018 Vijay Pundalik Patil .. Applicant vs 1. State of Maharasjtra 2.The Sarkarwada Police Stn. Dist Nasik .. Respondents Nr.Balkrishna D.Joshi for Applicants in ABA NO.01/2018 Mr.Anoop U.Patil for Applicant in ABA No.3/2018 Mr.Sandeep Barve for Intervener Ms.Veera Shinde Addl.Public Prosecutor for State CORAM : P. N.DESHMUKH,, J. DATE : 2ND APRIL, 2018. P.C.: Learned counsel Mr.Sandeep Barve submits that he be granted one week's time to file an application to intervene in this application. In that view of the matter, stand over to 11.4.2018. Interim orders to continue till the adjourned date. (P.N.DESHMUKH, J.) rng

Order - Status 27: Sarnobat IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAL APPLICATION NO. 01 OF 2018 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 430 OF 2018 Vijay Ramdas Nikam & Ors. Applicants. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. Respondent. Mr. Virendra Pethe i/by Mr. Balkrishna D. Joshi, for the Applicants. Mr. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent. CORAM : P. N. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 11th APRIL, 2018. P. C. : Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant No.1 Vijay Ramdas Nikam is already arrested and as such submits that application be allowed to be withdrawn against him as same is rendered infructuous and further contended that applicant No. 2-Anil Navnath Shinde has expired as he was suffering from Cancer. Learned APP on instructions from investigating officer confirms the same. Learned counsel submits that applicant No. 3-Sarangdhar Yadav Pansare do not want to prosecute this application and on his instruction seeks leave to withdraw the said application. In view of submissions advanced as aforesaid, application of applicant Nos. 1 and 2 stand disposed of, as application filed by applicant No.1 is rendered infructuous, since arrested, and applicant No. 2 is dead. Application of applicant No. 3 is allowed to be withdrawn as prayed for and as such stands dismissed. Anticipatory bail application is accordingly disposed of. In view of above, application No. 430/2018 for intervention is become infructuous and accordingly disposed of. [ P. N. DESHMUKH , J.]

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1462 OF 2022 Sunil Bherulal Joshi APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Adv. Lalita L. Rajguru for Applicant Shri. A. A. Palkar, APP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE BHARATI DANGRE J DATE : 6th June, 2022 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 13/06/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1462 OF 2022 Sunil Bherulal Joshi ] ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] ... Respondent … … Mr. Alankar Kirpekar i/b Ms. Lalita Rajguru for the applicant. Mr. A.A. Palkar, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 13TH JUNE, 2022. P.C.:- The applicant is arraigned as accused No.1 in C.R. No.213 of 2022 registered with Naya Nagar Police Station invoking Sections 498A, 376 and 384 of the IPC. On the basis of the complaint, the applicant, mother in law, father in law and sister in law were arraigned as accused. The complaint lodged on 26/03/2022 narrates that the complainant was married to the applicant on 04/12/2017 and when she started cohabiting in the matrimonial house, she was subjected to harassment. It is stated that on 16/08/2020, she was driven out of the house and she went to her parental house. Thereafter, on 02/03/2021, the matter was reconciled between the husband and the wife and, she again started residing with the applicant in their house located at Mira Road, Thane, but her allegation is that the harassment continued. She states that she was harassed by her mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-inlaw, who used to trouble her by insulting her. As far as father-in-law is concerned, serious allegations are leveled against him, seeking sexual favours and indulging in forcible sexual intercourse, due to which Section 376 of the IPC came to invoked against him. The father in law was granted protection from arrest by me by order dated 07/06/2022 in Anticipatory Bail Application No.1484 of 2022. Perusal of the accusation leveled against the applicant, justifying invocation of Section 498A of the IPC falls short of harassment and cruelty, contemplated under Section 498A of the IPC. The marriage was solemnized in the year 2017, but the FIR was registered after four years and when the FIR is perused the allegations are vague in nature and bereft of any particular material, barring that she was driven out from the matrimonial house. In the wake of the above, the applicant deserves an interim AJN protection subject to the stipulation that he shall render cooperation to the Investigating Officer. Hence the following order: ORDER (a) In the event of arrest, the applicant Sunil Bherulal Joshi shall be temporarily released on bail in C.R. No.213 of 2022 registered with Naya Nagar Police Station, District Thane, on executing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.25,000**/** and furnishing one or two sureties of the like amount. (b) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case and shall not tamper with prosecution evidence. List the application along with Anticipatory Bail Application No.1484 of 2022 on 11/07/2022. All parties are directed to act on the downloaded copy of the order supplied by the Advocate under his seal and signature. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1484 OF 2022 Bherulal Govind Joshi ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1462 OF 2022 Sunil Bherulal Joshi ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Alankar Kirpekar a/w. Ms. Lalita Rajguru, Mr. Piyush Tiwari i/b. Lalita Rajguru, for the Applicant Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent/State. Mr. Vinayak Jadhav, API, Naya Nagar police station. CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2023 P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. This application is preferred seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 213 of 2023 registered at Naya Nagar police station for the offences punishable under sections 376 and 498-A and 384 of Indian penal Code, 1860. The applicant in ABA No. 1484 of 2022 is the father in law of the first informant. The applicant in ABA No. 1462 of 2022 is her husband. In ABA No. 1484 of 2022, by an order dated 7th June, 2022 this Court was persuaded to grant interim protection ascribing reasons. The applicant in ABA No. 1462 of 2022 was also granted interim protection by an order dated 13th June, 2022. Both the applicants have attended the police station and cooperated with the investigation. So far as the applicant in ABA No. 1484 of 2022, the allegations are of illtreatment and sexual assault. While granting interim bail, this Court had adverted to the aspects of delay and the element of probability. Those reasons also weigh with the Court, in making the order of interim bail absolute. So far as the applicant in ABA No. 1462 of 2022 the allegations are primarily of matrimonial cruelty. I am, therefore, inclined to make the order of interim bail absolute qua Sunil Joshi as well. The order of interim bail dated 7th June, 2022 qua the applicant Bherulal Joshi (ABA No. 1484 of 2022) is made absolute on the terms and conditions incorporated therein. The order of temporary bail dated 13th June, 2022 qua the applicant Sunil Joshi (ABA No. 1462 of 2022) is made absolute on the terms and conditions incorporated therein. The applicants henceforth shall appear before the investigating officer as and when directed. The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and give threat or inducement to first informant, any of the prosecution witnesses or any person acquainted with the facts of the case. The applicants shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court. It is clarified that these prima facie observations are confined to determine entitlement to pre-arrest bail only. Applications disposed. (N. J. JAMADAR, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1647 OF 2021 Ashok Gena Sarwade .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … Mr.Vikrant V. Phatate for the Applicant. Mr.A.R.Kapadnis, APP for the State. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 17th JULY, 2021 P.C:- On showing disinclination to grant the relief as prayed for, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the application. Leave granted. Application stands dismissed as withdrawn. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J M.M.Salgaonkar

Order - Status 5: : 1 : 9.ABA-1461-21.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1461 OF 2021 Bharat Bajirao Pawar ….. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. Kedar Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. Smt. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM :SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 25th JUNE, 2021 [Through Video Conferencing] P.C. : Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant in this application is already arrested and, therefore, this application has become infructuous. Considering this statement, the application is disposed of as having rendered infructuous. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS)

Order - Status 4: CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1510 OF 2023 … … Ashish Satish Nikam ....Applicant V/S State of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Satyawrat Joshi i/b Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar for the Applicant. Mr. R.M. Pethe, APP for Respondent-State. Mangini Tukaram Malyalkar, ASI, Vita Police Station present in Court. CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 23rd MAY 2023. (VACATION COURT) P.C.: At the request of learned Counsel for the Applicant, stand over to 7 th June 2023. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)

Order - Status 7: SA Pathan IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1510 OF 2023 Ashish Satish Nikam … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Satyavrat Joshi i/by Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar, for the Applicant. Mr. Veera Shinde, APP for the State-Respondent. Mr.Dilip Shinde, for Intervener (Original Complainant). CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : JUNE 7, 2023 P.C.: This is an Application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking pre arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.229 of 2023 registered with Vita police station, Sangali for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 327 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution case, one Satish Sambhaji Nikam is the father-in-law of the informant who executed will deed of his property in the name of the wife of the informant and her younger brother. For this reason Applicant took grudge against the informant. On 24th April, 2023, when the informant had taken with him the gold ornaments from his shop, Satish Nikam along with Yash Nikam came there and asked the informant to accompany them to Vita in four wheeler vehicle. At about 3:00 pm when they reached Karve, Satish Nikam stopped his vehicle near the construction site of Dhaba of Applicant. There was discussion amongst them. During discussion, accused No.3 started assaulting informant. The Applicant assaulted informant. The other co-accused caused grievous injury to the informant. The informant, therefore, filed report with the respondent No.1-police station. Apprehending arrest, the Applicant filed Application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. which is rejected by the order dated 11th May, 2023. Aggrieved thereby, the Applicant has filed the present Application. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that he has been falsely implicated. Even as per the case of prosecution, the injuries attributed to the Applicant are simple in nature. There are no criminal antecedents. The Applicant is ready to co-operate with investigation and his custodial interrogation is not necessary. Per contra, learned APP and the Advocate for the informant submitted that considering seriousness of offences alleges against the Applicant, and nature of allegations, the custodial interrogation is necessary. It is also necessary to recover missing ornaments as alleged in the report. It is also necessary to investigate about the unknown person referred in the report. Having considered the submissions and the case diary produced by learned APP, it appears that injuries attributed to the Applicant are simple in nature. Prima facie there is dispute between the parties over immovable property. Considering the nature of injuries and the nature of allegations against the Applicant of assault, custodial interrogation of the Applicant is not required. Hence, following order: a) In the event of arrest of Applicants in connection with C.R. No.229 of 2023 registered with registered with Vita police station, Sangali for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 327 of the Indian Penal Code, the Applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) along with one or two sureties in the like amount. b) The applicant shall remain present before the concerned police station on 12th, 14th and 16th June, 2023 between 11:00 am to 1:00 pm. c) The Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation whenever is required. d) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. e) The Applicant at the time of execution of bond furnish his address and mobile number to the investigating officer and shall not change the residence without intimation to the investigating officer. The Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 559 OF 2018 Jamila Nasir Shaikh ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Vijay Dhananjay Upadhyay For Applicant Adv. A. A. Takalkar APP for State CORAM : SMT. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J DATE : 21st March, 2018 P.C. : Stand over to 22/03/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 559 OF 2018 Mrs. Jamila Nasir Shaikh .Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .Respondent Mr. V. D. Upadhyay, Advocate, for the Applicant Mrs. J. S. Lohokare, APP, for the Respondent – State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. DATE : 22.03.2018 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the parties. By this Application, the Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C. R. No. 56 of 2018 registered with the Malvani Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 363, 364(A), 342, 354(D), 366, 506 r/w 34of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 9, 10 & 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act ( for short 'POCSO' ). Learned counsel for the Applicant states that the Applicant has not been named in the FIR and that the allegations are essentially as against co-accused – Sohail. He submits that even in the remand report, the Applicant's name has not been disclosed. Learned APP states that the victim has taken the name of the Applicant as being the person who was present at the place where the incident took place. She submits that investigation is still in progress. Learned APP seeks time to take detailed instructions. In the meantime, till the next date, the Applicant is granted interim protection on the following terms & conditions :- O R D E R (i) In the event of arrest, the Applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; (ii) The Applicant shall report to the investigating officer of the concerned police station on 2 nd & 3rd April, 2018 between 10:00 a. m. and 12:00 noon. Stand over to 10.04.2018 . To be listed on the Supplementary Board . All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPTORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 559 OF 2018 Jamila Nasir Shaikh Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. Vijay Upadhyay for the Applicant Ms. J. S. Lohokare, A.P.P for the Respondent-State API Mr. Ananda Vishnu Bagadi from Malvani Police Station is present CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. TUESDAY, 10th APRIL, 2018 P.C. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 56 of 2018 registered with the Malvani Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 363, 364(A), 342, 354(D), 366, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 9, 10 and 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has not been named in the FIR and that the allegations are essentially as against co-accused-Sohail. He submits that even in the remand report, the applicant's name has not been disclosed. Perused the papers. It appears and it is not disputed by the learned A.P.P that the victim has taken the name of the person, as she was present at the place where the incident took place. Learned A.P.P submits that apart from the same, there are no other allegations qua the applicant. It appears that the applicant has reported to the Investigating Officer pursuant to the interim protection granted to her vide order dated 22nd March, 2018. Considering the role of the applicant, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. Hence, the applicant is granted pre-arrest bail on the following terms and conditions : ORDER (i) In the event of the arrest, the applicant be enlarged on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount ; (ii) The applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station as and when called; (iii) The applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case. (iv) The applicant to cooperate with the investigating agency; The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of. It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie, for the purpose of deciding this application. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1182 OF 2024 Ranjana Somnath Wagh ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Ms.Saili Dhuru for Applicant Mr.Nitin B.Patil APP for State/Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 29th April, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 30/04/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: Board Sr.No.:-0 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1182 OF 2024 Ranjana Somnath Wagh ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 30th April, 2024 P.C. : Matter did not reach till the court time was over. Hence adjourned. Stand over to 02/05/2024. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: Board Sr.No.:-0 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 1182 OF 2024 Ranjana Somnath Wagh ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 2nd May, 2024 P.C. : Matter did not reach till the court time was over. Hence adjourned. Stand over to 03/05/2024. on Supplementry Board ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1173 OF 2024 Snehal Somnath Wagh ..Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1182 OF 2024 Ranjana Somnath Wagh ..Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent _____ Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil a/w. Rohin. R. Chauhan i/b. Saili Dhuru for Applicants in both ABAs. Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP for State/Respondent. _____ CORAM :- SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE :- 3 MAY 2024 P.C. :- Both these applications are decided by this common order as they arise out of the same registered offence. The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No.15 of 2024 registered at Khadakwasla Police Station, Pune city, on 26.02.2024, under Sections 302, 498- A and 109 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Heard Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Nitin Patil, learned APP for the State. The F.I.R. is lodged by one Tarabai Ilag. She has stated that her younger daughter Suvarna was married to Somnath Wagh. The present applicant Ranjana is the first wife of Somnath and the applicant Snehal is their daughter. It is alleged that, Somnath told the informant that he wanted a son and the applicant Suvarna was not able to give him a son and, therefore, he wanted to marry the informant's daughter Suvarna. After marriage, Somnath and Suvarna had one daughter and one son. It is alleged that Suvarna used to tell the informant telephonically that, both these applicants used to instigate Somnath and he used to abuse and beat her. The applicants used to harass her. On one occasion, Somnath assaulted her brutally after disrobing her. In short, Somnath was treating her with cruelty. On 25.02.2024, both of them died i.e. Somnath and Suvarna died in suspicious circumstances. As of today, the prosecution case is that both of them had gone for a walk. Somnath assaulted Suvarna with a stone on her head causing her death and then he committed suicide by hanging himself. Their dead bodies were noticed by others and then police were informed. On this basis the F.I.R. was lodged. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that, there is absolutely no material against the present applicants in respect of the main offence of murder and the alleged suicide committed by Somnath. Learned APP submitted that the investigation is in very initial stage. As of today, it is not possible to reach a definite conclusion. He submitted that, more investigation is necessary to find out what exactly had happened. Even postmortem notes are awaited. Learned APP produced the investigation papers before the Court. I have considered these submissions. The statements of children of Suvarna and Somnath are recorded. They have not supported the prosecution case. Apart from that, there are statements of two witnesses who have indicated that Somnath might be suspecting Suvarna's character which had resulted in this incident. Thus, as of today, sufficient doubt is created about the applicants' involvement in the offence. However, the investigating agency needs sufficient opportunity to consider all the aspects of this matter. Therefore, as of today, instead of disposing of these applications, ad-interim relief can be granted to the applicants till the next date with directions to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the following order. O R D E R i) In the event of their arrest in connection with C.R.No.15 of 2024 registered at Khadakwasla Police Station, Pune city, till the next date, the Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing P. R. bonds in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each (Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties each in the like amount. ii) This order shall operate till 28/06/2024. iii) The Applicants shall attend the concerned Police Station from 20/05/2024 to 22/05/2024 between 1.00p.m. to 5.00p.m. and thereafter as and when called and shall cooperate with the investigation. iv) Stand over to 28/06/2024. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 13: : 1 : 35-ABA-1173-24+.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1173 OF 2024 Snehal Somnath Wagh …Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent ….. WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1182 OF 2024 Ranjana Somnath Wagh …..Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil, Advocate i/b. Saili Dhuru for the Applicants. Smt. Sangita D. Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Nilkanth Rajaram Jagtap, Police Inspector, Warje Malwadi police station, Pune. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 28th JUNE, 2024 P.C. : The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R. No.15/2024 registered at Khadakwasla police station (which was subsequently investigated by Warje Malwadi Police Station) under Sections 302, 498-A, 109 read with 34 of IPC. On the previous occasion, the Applicants were protected by way of ad-interim order dated 3.5.2024 and both of them were directed to report to the police station. Learned APP, on instructions, states that both the Applicants have reported to the police station and have cooperated with the investigation. Learned APP, on instructions of the I.O., further makes a statement that there is no evidence against the present Applicants and the investigating agency does not want to arrest them in connection with this offence. The statement is recorded. In view of this statement, learned counsel for the Applicants does not press these Applications. Hence, the Applications are disposed of as not pressed. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Digitally signed by PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Date: 2024.07.03 11:25:34 +0530

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 981 OF 2018 Mrs. Aditi Arun Shinde Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. Prakash Wagh for the Applicant. Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : V. L. ACHLIYA, J. (VACATION COURT) DATE : 15th MAY, 2018. P. C. : Learned Counsel for the applicant, on instructions, seeks permission to withdraw the application with liberty to surrender before the Investigating Officer within five days. Allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed. The applicant shall not be arrested till 20.05.2018 to enable her to surrender before the Investigating Officer. Application stands disposed of as withdrawn. [V. L. ACHLIYA, J.]

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 143 OF 2025 Shrikant Basanna Khanapure …Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra Respondent. WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.131 OF 2025 Zakirhussain Allabaksha Naikwadi Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra Respondent. Mr. Jaydeep Mane for the Applicant. Mr. Tanveer Khan, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 21.01.2025. P.C. : The applicants namely (1). Shrikant Khanapure and (2). Zakirhussain Allabaksha Naikwadi were working as Junior Engineer and Assistant Engineer with Solapur Municipal Corporation respectively. The allegations against them are that they had unauthorizedly issued about 18 building permits. It appears that the corporation had already conducted departmental enquiry against them and imposed certain punishment. According to the applicants as the applications were made during their tenure, they were asked to issue the building permits in question. Learned APP submits that the applicants be directed to attend the concerned police station to verify their claim. The applicants shall attend the concerned police station from 27.01.2025 to 30.01.2025 between 11.00 am to 2.00 pm and shall cooperate in the investigation. List the applications on 06.02.2025. Till next date, the applicants shall not be arrested. [N.R.BORKAR, J.]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 274 OF 2025 Shivshankar Balwant Ghate Versus Applicant The State of Maharashtra Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 131 OF 2025 Zakirhussain Allabaksha Naikwadi Versus Applicant The State of Maharashtra Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 132 OF 2025 Anand Vasant Kshirsagar Applicant Versus The State Of Maharashtra Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 143 OF 2025 Shrikant Basanna Khanapure Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent …. Mr. Amol Hunge, Advocate for the Applicant in ABA 274/2025. …. Mr. J.D. Mane, Advocate for the Applicant in ABA 131/2025. Mrs. G. P. Mulekar, A.P.P. for the Respondent – State. CORAM : N. R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 06th February, 2025. P.C. : Registry to verify and place the matter before the appropriate Bench. Ad-interim relief, if any granted earlier shall continue to operate till the next date. (N. R. BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 11: 2025:BHC-AS:7048 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 274/2025 SHIVSHANKAR BALWANT GHATE APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 131/2025 ZAKIRHUSSAIN ALLABAKSHA NAIKWADI ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 132/2025 ANAND VASANT KSHIRSAGAR ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 143/2025 SHRIKANT BASANNA KHANAPURE APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT Mr. Kishor Ajetrao a/w. Adv. Amol Hunge (through VC) for the applicant in ABA/274/2025. Mr. Jaydeep Mane for the applicants in ABA – 131/2025, 132/2025, 143/2025. Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP for the State in all ABAs. CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 12, 2025. P.C. : ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 274/2025:- 1. After the matter was argued for some time, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant seeks leave to withdraw this application. 2. The application is disposed of as withdrawn. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 131/2025 W ITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 132/2025 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 143/2025 :- 3. These applications are filed for seeking pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with the First Information Report (FIR) No. 627/2024 registered with the Sadar Bazaar Police Station, Solapur City, Solapur, for the offence punishable under Sections 408, 419, 420, 466, 468, 469, 471, 473, 476 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 8 and 9 of the Maharashtra Public Records Act, 2005. 4. It is the case of the applicants that the only allegation against them is that they have accepted off-line proposals for sanctioning when the Corporation had started the process of accepting only online proposal. It is submitted that either the proposals were before the datum line 1/1/2022 and as there was a G.R. of the Government all proposals could have been even accepted offline. It is submitted 2 that three applicants were compulsorily made to retire by the Corporation. There is a delay in lodging the FIR. Apart from the applicants, there were other employees of the Corporation who were similarly placed like the present applicants viz. Lokhande, Tavagonde and others against whom the Corporation has not taken any action. Even though the three applicants were made to compulsory retire, their retirement benefits have not been entirely paid as of date. The applicant Shrikant Khanapure worked in the Building Proposal Department from 1/1/2015 to 27/6/2022. The applicant Anand Kshirsagar worked in the Department from 2017 up till now. Ghate worked from 1/12/2020 to 27/9/2022. The applicant Zakirhussain Naikwadi worked in the Town Planning Department from 1/12/2020 to 16/5/2022. 5. Ultimately, the Corporation has found them guilty, as regards the irregularities. Without admitting and for the sake of argument, if it is considered to be true even then these are mere irregularities which can be always regularized. The applicants have already been fined by the Corporation for a sum of Rs.1 lakh each, therefore, further punishment is not required. 6. The learned APP on behalf of the State submitted that a total cheating as of now appears to be more than Rs.2,10,00,000/-. The statements have been recorded as of now for 39 proposals. The cheating is likely to be played in many more such proposals. The statements of 16 persons have already been recorded, they are employees of the Corporation and also private engineers who have filed complaint against the present applicants on behalf of the parties who have applied for seeking permission for construction. Therefore, the present anticipatory bail application should be rejected as the custody of the present applicants would be required in order to find out how such proposals up till now have been illegally sanctioned by the present applicants. 7. All the three applicants are the employees of the Corporation working in Town Planning/Building Proposal Department of the Corporation and are directly entrusted with the work of sanctioning development permission. Out of four accused persons, three are the engineers working in Town Planning/Building Proposal Department and the applicant Anand Kshirsagar is a clerk working in the Town Planning Department. The three engineers are no more working with the Corporation as there was the Departmental Enquiry against them where they were found guilty and they have voluntarily retired from the Corporation. 4 8. The allegations made by the informant (the Commissioner of the Corporation) is that in around 96 proposals, the present applicants have committed irregularities and have sanctioned the proposals, (a) granting more FSI than permissible limits; (b) Considering the off line proposals, when as per new rules of proposals were to be made online; (c) not informing the Tax Department of the Corporation about sanctioning of the proposals, hence, the Corporation suffered losses. 9. The applicant Ghate and the applicant Shrikant Kharapure were the Junior Engineers who were supposed to be on the field and after inspection to make recommendation for sanctioning the files for development. The applicant Zakirhussain Naikwadi was the Assistant Engineer who used to sign after the Junior Engineer had cleared the file. The applicant Anand Kshirsagar was a clerk who used to purposely with intention to play fraud keep blanks in the register of the Corporation. The applicant Ghate has chosen to withdraw his anticipatory bail application. 10. The learned APP has submitted that the fraud/cheating as of today is amounting to Rs.2,20,00,000/-. The statements of 16 5 witnesses have already been recorded who are the employees of the Corporation and Engineers of various private parties who had applied for sanction of their proposal for development. All of them have pointed fingers towards the present applicants. In the Departmental Enquiry, the applicants have been found guilty and they have been imposed fine of Rs.1,00,000/- each. The outward register file has been destroyed by the applicants as informed by the staff. The investigating officer has been investigating the matter and up till now they have recorded the statements for 39 proposals and many such proposals according to the learned APP are likely to come forward where fraud has been committed by the present applicants. 11. The Supreme Court in case of Sumitha Pradeep vs. Arun Kumar C.K. and another 1 in paragraph 12 has held as under :- "……….. In many anticipatory bail matters, we have noticed one common argument being canvassed that no custodial interrogation is required and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted. There appears to be a serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to grant anticipatory bail. Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds while deciding an application seeking anticipatory bail. There may be many cases in which the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required, but that does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should be ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail. The first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application should consider is the prima facie case put up 1 (2022) 17 SCC 391 against the accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be looked into along with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline anticipatory bail. However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail." (Emphasis supplied) 12. Therefore, it is not necessary that in every case just because the custody is not necessary, the anticipatory bail application should be allowed. 13. In the present matter, taking into consideration the role played by all the three applicants whereby a grave loss has been incurred by the Corporation as the FSI has been increased by the present applicants, even when they were not holding their posts in the Town Planning/Building Proposal Department proves that they had intention to play fraud on the Corporation. The Corporation has lost a big revenue by the fraud played by all the four applicants. In further enquiry if it is found that there is violation of FSI condition, all the proposals would be rejected which will further cause loss to the parties whose files have been illegally cleared by the applicants. In this view of the matter, there is no merit in the present anticipatory bail applications. The same are rejected and disposed of accordingly. (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)