Satish Baburao Patil v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3193 of 2024 Satish Baburao Patil Age 58 years, Occ.: Business, R/at. Flat No.2402, 24th Floor, Raheja Odyssey, Off. Western Express Highway, Magathane, Kandivali(E), Mumbai - 400 101.
... Applicant versus
1. The State of Maharashtra (Through Navghar Police Station)
2. Gaurav Suryakant Bhosale 1001, 10th Floor, Daan Vijay Society, Near Gavhanpada Signal, Mulund (W), Mumbai - 412 101.
... Respondents with Digitally signed by MAMTA AMAR KALE Date:
2025.06.16 18:55:59 +0530 MAMTA AMAR KALE Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3208 of 2024 Umed Amirali Dodhia Age 53 years, Occ. Business, R/at. B-Bungalow, Shiv Shakti Complex, Dahisar (East), Mumbai - 400 068.
... Applicant versus
1. The State of Maharashtra (At the instance of Sr. PI Navghar Police Station, Mumbai)
2. Gaurav Suryakant Bhosle R/o. 1001, Gavhanpada Signal, Daan Vijay Society, Mulund East, Mumbai.
... Respondents ---- Mr Prathamesh Vhanmane i/b Mr Akhilesh Chaubey, for the Applicant in ABA/3193/2024 (through VC).
Mr Omkar Mulekar, for the Applicant in ABA/3208/2024. Mr Yogesh Y Dabke, APP, for Respondent No.1 / State. Respondent No.2-in-person present in both matters. PSI-Padir Ramakant Sawant, Navghar Police Station, Mumbai, is present.
---- Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 16 June 2025 P.C.:
.
Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2.
By these applications, the applicants seek pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.240 of 2024, registered at Navghar Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3.
The prosecution alleges that the applicants, in connivance with the co-accused, induced the informant to invest a sum of Rs.28,70,000/- in a redevelopment scheme. However, they subsequently failed to fulfil their commitments and failed to return the accepted amount.
4.
At the outset, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants and respondent No.2 (the informant) appearing in person, jointly submit that respondent No.2 and the applicants have resolved their dispute amicably. Respondent No.2 has received the due amount from the applicants, has no grievance, and expressed his consent to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicants. They further submit that the consent terms executed by the parties have already been handed over to the investigating officer. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing respondent No.1/ State submits that the investigation is complete and the prosecution does not require the applicants' custody.
5.
After perusing the records, it appears that the origin of the offence is civil in nature, arising from the sale of the property. The involved parties have now reached a comprehensive settlement regarding their dispute. Respondent No.2/ the complainant, present in the Court and identified by the Investigating Officer, when questioned, does not object and consents to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicants. Furthermore, the learned APP fairly submits that the investigation is complete, and the custody of the applicants is not required. In light of these developments, this Court deems it fit to exercise
its discretion in favour of the applicants. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(i) In the event of the applicants' arrest in connection with CR No.240 of 2024, registered at Navghar Police Station, Mumbai, they shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- each and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.
6.
The applications stand disposed of accordingly. (R.N. Laddha, J.)