Sandip Tukaram Navgire v. The State Of Maharashtra

55.ABA.3098.2023.doc by ANANT KRISHNA NAIK Date:

2025.08.02 16:10:40 +0530 ANANT KRISHNA NAIK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3098 OF 2023 Sandip Tukaram Navgire ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr

...Respondents

*** Mr. Akil Kupade i/b. Mr. Samadhan A. Kashid for the Applicant. Mr. Deepak Lad for the Respondent No. 2 Ms R. S. Tendulkar, APP for the Respondent-State Mr. Keshav Randive, PSI Sangli City Police Station present. ***

CORAM

: M. M. SATHAYE, J.

DATED : 1st AUGUST 2025 P.C.:

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties and learned APP for the Respondent-State.

2.

This is an application for pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R.No.477 of 2023 registered with Sangli City Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999. The Applicant is Accused No. 1.

3.

Admittedly, under order dated 03/11/2023, the Applicant is protected by the order of this Court.

4.

It is recorded in the earlier order that out of Rs.1.00 Crore, allegedly invested by the Complainant on the promise of handsome return, the Rs.58,95,000/- are already recovered / returned. akn 1/2

55.ABA.3098.2023.doc 5.

Learned advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant has co-operated with the investigation. Learned APP on instructions from the Investigating Officer (who is present in the Court) submits that the investigation is completed, so far as present Applicant is concerned. It is further informed on the query of the Court, that there are no antecedents and no other complainants/victims have emerged in the investigation so far. 6.

Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 2/Complainant has opposed the grant of Anticipatory Bail Application on the ground that vouchers relied upon by the Applicant are forged documents and there is need for expert analysis for handwriting. He submits that charge-sheet is not yet filed and therefore anticipatory bail should not be confirmed. 7.

I have considered the submissions. The charges leveled in the FIR are under section 420 and 406 r/w 34 of the IPC. The charge of forgery is not involved so far in the matter. Considering that as per FIR itself an amount of Rs.58,95,000/- is returned and no grievance is made about Applicant's cooperation with the investigation so far, as also considering that the Applicant has been protected for last about 2 years, case for grant of this Application is made out. Hence, the following order:

(a) Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed in terms of order dated 03/11/2023.

(b) Applicant (Sandip Tukaram Navgire) is directed to report to the concerned Investigating Officer, as and when required with sufficient notice.

8.

Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of in above terms. (M. M. SATHAYE, J.) akn 2/2