Rohit Kashinath Keni v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2552 OF 2025 Rohit Kashinath Keni ...Applicant V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
Sr. Adv. Mr. Rajendra Shirodkar a/w Mr. Archit Sakhalkar, Mr. Nihar Ghag, Mr. Darshan Zagade, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. B. V. Holambe Patil a/w Adv. S. Shinde, APP for the Respondent/State.
CORAM
:
N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE :
18.09.2025.
P.C. :
1.
This is an application for Anticipatory Bail. 2.
The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 785 of 2024 registered at Chitalsar Manpada Police Station, DistThane, for the offences punishable under Sections 420 & 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishment) Act.
3.
The allegations against the present applicant and other 1/4
co-accused are of defrauding the investors.
4.
The learned senior counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 16.09.2025 in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 10901 of 2025. By the said order, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has granted anticipatory bail to the co-accused Shilpa Karmarkar. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while granting bail to the said co-accused, has observed that the main allegations of defrauding the investors are against the husband of said co-accused Shilpa Karmarkar. The learned senior counsel submits that initially the witness summons was issued to the present applicant. It is submitted that the applicant is also victim of the co-accused Shilpa Karmarkar and her husband.
5.
On the other hand, the learned APP for the respondentState submits that the amount of Rs.1,80,00,000/- was transferred to the account of the present applicant by the co-accused Girish Karmarkar. It is submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary to interrogate him in respect of the said amount. It is, thus, submitted that the applicant may not be 2/4
released on anticipatory bail.
6.
I have perused the First Information Report. The main allegations are against the co-accused Shilpa Karmarkar and her husband Girish Karmarkar. From the documents filed on record. Prima-facie, the applicant appears to be one of the investors. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. In the result, the following order is passed :
O R D E R
a) The Application is allowed.
b) In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with Crime No. 785 of 2024 registered at Chitalsar Manpada Police Station, Dist- Thane for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 & 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act. The 3/4
applicant be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
c) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the investigating officer and shall co-operate in the investigation.
[N.R.BORKAR, J.] 4/4