Kedar Dynaneshwar Garde v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1775 OF 2025 Kedar D. Garde ...Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent.

..............

Mr. Girish Palav a/w. Adv. Falguni Brahmbhatt for the Applicant. Mr. Vinod Chate, APP for the Respondent/State. PSI Pravin Dharma Sane, Shivajinagar Police Station. ..............

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

09.05.2025.

P.C. :

1.

This is an application for regular bail.

2.

The applicant came to be arrested in Crime No.722 of 2024 registered at Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Kolhapur for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 316(5), 318(2), 319(2), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3.

The allegations against the present applicant and other coaccused are that they on the basis of forged documents defrauded the complainant company to the tune of Rs.2,99,02,200/-. 4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent- State.

1/3

5.

The bail is sought on the ground of parity. In support of the said ground, the learned counsel for the applicant has produced on record the copy of order passed by this Court dated 11 November 2024 in Criminal Bail Application No. 4033 of 2024. By the said order, this Court has released the co-accused Anagha J. Natu on bail.

6.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the alleged crime. It is submitted that the main allegations are against the co-accused Jayesh Natu. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail for about 7 months and the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. It is thus submitted that the applicant may be released on bail. 7.

On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State submits that the case of the present applicant cannot be equated with the co-accused Anagha Natu as this Court has found that though she was Partner of the firm, however, her husband was doing all the transaction on her behalf. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the applicant may not be released on bail.

8.

I have perused the chargesheet. The allegations of forgery are against the co-accused. There are no other criminal antecedents against the present applicant. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. In the result, the following order is passed. 2/3

O R D E R

A] The Application is allowed.

B] The applicant be released on bail in C.R. No. 722 of 2024 registered at Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Kolhapur for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 316(5), 318(2), 319(2), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on furnishing P.R Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

C] The applicant shall attend the concerned police station once in a month ,i.e., on first Saturday between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial.

[N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3