Dilip Dagdu Manjulkar v. State Of Maharashtra

Ajit Pathrikar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4025 OF 2025 Dilip Dagdu Manjulkar ...Applicant

Versus

State Of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Keshav Chavan i/b Anita D. Marbal, for the Applicant. Ms. Manisha R. Tidke, APP for the State-Respondent. API - Utkarsh Vaze, Unit-9, DCB CID Bandra, Mumbai, is present.

CORAM

Dr. Neela Gokhale, J.

DATED:

6th NOVEMBER 2025 PC:- 1.

The Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with C.R. No. 357 of 2023 dated 9th July 2023 registered with the Versova Police Station for offences punishable under Section 386, 364-A, 323, 504, 506(2) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "IPC").

2.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that the six accused implicated in the present case were in a conspiracy and with intent to extort some amount from the Complainant,

impersonated police officers and extorted an amount of Rs.5,30,000/- from the Complainant by using online banking and UPI mode of transfer of funds. It is alleged that the accused threatened the mother of the Complainant since the Complainant himself was not at home at that time. In these circumstances, the FIR was registered and the accused was arrested.

3.

At the very outset, Mr. Keshav Chavan, learned Counsel for the Applicant, draws my attention to an order dated 29th August 2025 passed by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 3776 of 2025 in SLP (Criminal) No. 7093 of 2025, whereby the Supreme Court, having regard to the nature of the allegations as also to the fact that the main accused has suffered over two years of incarceration pending trial, granted bail to the said main accused. Mr. Chavan also submits that the other three co-accused are also enlarged on bail by orders passed by the Sessions Court. In these circumstances, the Applicant seeking parity and also seeks to be enlarged on bail.

4.

Ms. Manisha Tidke, learned APP, states that there are two other antecedents in respect of the Applicant having alleged to have committed an offence of cheating earlier. 5.

Be that as it may, I have perused the order of the Supreme Court as well as the orders passed by the Sessions Court in respect of the other co-accused. The Supreme Court has clearly observed that there is a delay in concluding the trial in respect of the main accused. In these circumstances, only on the doctrine of parity, I am inclined to enlarge the Applicant on bail and it is ordered as under:

ORDER

i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;

ii) The Applicant shall attend the Versova Police Station, on first Monday of every month between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon, till the charges are framed by the Trial Court. He shall

also attend the Trial Court concerned on each and every date as directed, till the conclusion of the trial, save and except if the Applicant is exempted from appearance by orders of the Trial Court;

iii) If the Applicant has not deposited his passport, the Applicant shall deposit the same with the concerned Police Station, if any;

iv) The Applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

v) The Applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and mobile contact number immediately after being released and / or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Court seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station; vi) The Applicant to co-operate with the conduct of the trial;

vii) Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions shall entail cancellation of bail;

6.

Application is allowed in the above terms and is accordingly disposed of.

7.

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie and are confined to this Application and the Trial Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein.

(Dr. Neela Gokhale, J)