Vikas Gajanan Sharma And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 305 OF 2025 Vikas Gajanan Sharma And Ors ...Applicants

Versus

State Of Maharashtra

...Respondents

____________________________________ Adv. Abhishek Yende, Adv. Surbhi Agrawal, Adv. Aniket Trivedi, Advocate for the Applicants.

Mr. Anand Shalgaonkar, APP for the State.

Adv. Mohit Dalvi a/w. Adv. Shwta Gawali, h/f. Adv. Pankaj Das, Advocate for the Infoamant.

PI. Santosh Gaikar, PI Mulun Police Station present. ____________________________________

CORAM

: RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATED : 20 FEBRUARY 2025 P.C.:

1.

The learned Advocate for the Applicant seeks liberty to amend the Anticipatory Bail Application and add the first Informant as a party Respondent No.2. Liberty is granted, as prayed for. 2.

Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

3.

The learned Advocate for the Applicants to serve copy of the Anticipatory Bail Application to newly added Respondent No2. 4.

The learned Advocate for the Applicants submits that the

transaction in question is of a civil nature, pertaining to goods sold and delivered. As of date, no civil suit for recovery has been filed against the present Applicant by the Informant.

5.

He submits that the total transactions between the parties was amounted to Rs.35 Crores, out of which Rs.27 Crores have already been paid. The remaining balance of Rs.8 Crore could not be paid due to financial difficulties faced by present Applicants. Therefore, the F.I.R. has been lodged against the Applicants, as well as certain other individuals, including a Chartered Accountant who, according to the Informant, facilitated the preparation of documents termed as a foreign bank guarantee.

6.

The learned Advocate for the Applicant further submitted that today he is filing an affidavit/undertaking on behalf of the Applicant No.1(Vikash Gajanand Sharma). In the said affidavit/undertaking, it is specifically stated that 20% of the disputed amount will be deposited in this Court within a three weeks from today, while a timeline will be required for the remaining 80%, which will be submitted on the next date of the hearing.

7.

The undertaking dated 5 February 2025 submitted by Applicant No.1 (Vikash Gajanand Sharma), is taken on record and marked as "X" for identification. All statements/undertaking mentioned in the

undertaking dated 5 February 2025 are accepted as an undertaking to this Court. For ease of reference, the said undertaking is scanned and reproduced hereinbelow :

8.

Since the advocate appearing on behalf fo the Applicant, on instructions of the Applicant and while filing the present undertaking, has specifically argued that if the 20% amount, which is to be deposited within three weeks to show their bona fides, is not deposited, the present Anticipatory Bail Application may be treated as rejected, the said undertaking given by the Advocate for the Applicants, on instructions of the Applicants, is accepted.

8, The Applicants are granted three weeks' time, without prejudice to the rights any of the parties, to deposit a sum equivalent to 20% of the disputed amount, which would be Rs.1,60,00,000/-. 9.

Since the Applicant is voluntarily depositing 20% of the Rs.8 Crores for a limited period of three weeks, the police should not take any coercive steps against the Applicants.

10.

The matter to come up on 17 March, 2025 under the caption "For Directions".

11.

In the meanwhile, the Applicant should also attend the concerned police station on 26 February 2025, 27 February 2025 and 28 February 2025 between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.

12.

Mr. Dalvi seeks liberty to file reply on behalf of the Informant. Liberty is granted as prayed for.

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)