Mohammad Aleem Khan v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1103 OF 2025 Riyaz F. Inamdar ...Applicant V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Respondents.
WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1100 OF 2025 Mohammad Aleem Khan ...Applicant V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Respondents.
..............
Mr. Sundeep Singh a/w. Mr. Mahendra Yadav and Ms Mansi Singh for the Applicant in ABA/1103/25.
Adv. Shyamrishi Pathak and Ms Jyoti Baraj for the Applicant in ABA/1100/25.
Mrs. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Tarun Shrama a/w. Mr. Mahesh Patil and Ms Sakshi Mishra for the Respondent No.2/first informant.
PSI Lande, Kashigoan Police Station present.
..............
CORAM
:
N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE :
16.09.2025.
P.C. :
1.
Both these applications filed for anticipatory bail are arising out of one and the same crime. Both these applications are thus being disposed of by this common order.
2.
The applicants are apprehending their arrest in Crime No.61 of 2025 registered at Kashigaon Police Station, Mira-Bhayander for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 1/3
3.
According to the prosecution, the present applicants had induced the first informant and witnesses to invest money in their gold trading business on the assurance that they would return the money with 25% profit. It is alleged that applicants defrauded the first informant and witnesses to the tune of Rs.3,04,43,880/-. 4.
I have heard Mr. Sundeep Singh, learned counsel appearing for the applicant in ABA No.1103 of 2025, Mr. Shyamrishi Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant in ABA No.1100 of 2025, Ms Rutuja Ambekar, learned APP for the respondent/ State and Mr. Tarun Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/first informant.
5.
Learned counsels for the applicants submit that according to the first informant and witnesses, they deposited the money in the account of M.H.K Gypsum Industries owned by the applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1100 of 2025. It is submitted that the applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1100 of 2025 has not received any amount as alleged. It is submitted that there is a delay in lodging the first information report. It is submitted that the applicants are ready to co-operate in the investigation. 6.
On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2/first informant submit that considering the nature of crime, the applicants may not be released on anticipatory bail.
2/3
7.
I have perused the FIR. According to the first informant, he and witnesses have deposited the amount in the account of M.H.K. Gypsum Industries. No documents are produced in support of the said allegations. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to release the applicants on anticipatory bail. In the result the following order is passed.
ORDER
A) The Applications are allowed.
B) In the event of arrest of the applicants in C.R. No. 61 of 2025 registered at Kashigaon Police Station, MiraBhayander for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, they be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety or two sureties in the like amount.
C) The applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when called shall cooperate in the investigation. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3