Niranjan Suresh Kulkarni v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 807 OF 2025 Niranjan Suresh Kulkarni ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Respondents
....
Mr. Shrirang Katneshwar a/w Mr. Sandeep Gupta, Mr. Vivek C., Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. Swapnil Walve, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1 - State. Adv. Darshana V. G. a/w Manisha Dongre, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.
....
CORAM
:
N. R. BORKAR, J.
DATE :
25th MARCH, 2025.
P.C.
:
1.
This is an application for regular bail.
2.
The applicant came to be arrested in Crime No. 366 of 2024 registered at Mumbai Naka Police Station, District : Nashik, for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 341(1), 342(2) and 351(4) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3.
FIR is lodged by Narsimha Reddy, owner of one manufacturing business.
4.
The informant visited Nashik on 12/01/2024 for a business trip. At that time, one Mr. Manohar, informant's acquaintance, introduced the informant to the applicant. While conversing with the applicant, the informant told him that his maternal uncle namely Pratap Reddy was an MLA as well as an MP in Telangana for 3 times in the past. To which the applicant told him that he too has various political connections and that he can help Mr. Pratap Reddy to become a Governor of any state, for which he demanded Rs.15 Crore. Upon discussing the said proposal with Mr. Pratap Reddy, the informant gave his consent to the applicant.
5.
On 07/02/2024, the informant met the applicant at Nashik, where a demand was made for Rs. 50-60 lakh as token amount for the work. The applicant assured the informant that the said work will be done and in case if it is not done then the applicant will transfer his landed property in the name of the informant. Accordingly, certain property documents in the name of the applicant were shown to the informant. Subsequently, documents with regards to a 100-acre land near Pench & Bhor Tiger Reserve Project were shown and it was
stated that the said land is given on lease by the Government of Maharashtra to the applicant. Furthermore, documents with regards to a land at Chandshi Gaon were also shown. The informant trusted the applicant and Rs.60 Lakh in cash were given to the applicant.
6.
On 15/02/2024, the applicant told the informant that next month Mr. Pratap Reddy will be appointed as a Governor and accordingly the remaining amount should be transferred to him. An amount of Rs.4,48,99,876/- was transferred to the bank accounts of the applicant, his father and his father's foundation namely Vaishwik Seva Foundation. Therefore, total amount of Rs.5,08,99,876/- was given to the applicant. Thereafter, blank cheques worth Rs. 9 crores were given to the Applicant.
7.
On 21/03/2024, the informant inquired about the said work, to which he told him that the post is confirmed but it will take some time for the process. The applicant in order to further assure the informant, told him that he will send him a draft agreement of his properties and the informant can sign them and send it to him. Accordingly, on 21/03/2024, the said
agreement was sent by the Applicant. The informant prepared and signed the same and couriered it to the applicant on 01/04/2024. However, the applicant delayed sending it back to the informant and upon inquiring the applicant avoided him and gave evasive answers. Therefore, the informant got suspicious and inquired about the said landed properties as promised by the applicant. It was found that, there is no land leased in the name of the applicant and there is no land in the name of the applicant at Chandshi village. Subsequently, the informant realized that he has been defrauded. 8.
I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for the Respondent No.2.
9.
The learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 submits that the parties have settled the matter amicably. The Respondent No.2 has filed the affidavit dated 17.03.2025 to that effect on record. 10.
The learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1-State submits that the applicant is involved in serious crime of forgery and cheating. It is submitted that considering the
nature of crime, the applicant may not be released on bail. 11.
The applicant is in jail for more than three months. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
ORDER
(i) Criminal Bail Application is allowed;
(ii) The applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 366 of 2024 registered at Mumbai Naka Police Station, District : Nashik, for the offences punishable under Sections 316(5), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 341(1), 342(2) and 351(4) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;
(iii) Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(N. R. BORKAR, J.)