Sunita Karunakar Poojary v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3313 OF 2025 Sunita K. Poojary ...Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent.

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

Mr. Khwaja Shaikh a/w. Mr. Vijay Sharma for the Applicant. Mr. V.N. Sagare, APP for the Respondent/State. API Poonam B. Ruge, Sakinaka Police Station is present. ..............

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

03.12.2025.

P.C. :

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2.

The applicant is apprehending her arrest in Crime No.1040 of 2025 registered at Sakinaka Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

3.

The husband of the present applicant, who is the co-accused in the present crime, is a Real Estate Broker. According to the first informant, she wanted to purchase flat. It is alleged that the applicant's husband showed the informant a flat under the MHADA Housing Scheme. It is further alleged that the husband of the present applicant had accepted amount an of Rs.37 lakhs from the first informant towards the purchase of the said flat. He further assured the first informant that the flat had been allotted in his 1/3

favour and allegedly provided forged documents to that effect. 4.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent / State. 5.

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 husband of the applicant. It is submitted that nothing is to be recovered at the instance of the applicant and therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation.

6.

On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State submits that the applicant is involved in a serious crime of forgery and cheating. It is submitted that there are specific allegations against the applicant. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail. 7.

I have perused the first information report. The main allegations are against the husband of the present applicant and the other co-accused Sunny Kamble. There are no other criminal antecedents against the present applicant. Considering the said facts, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. In the result, the following order is passed.

ORDER

A) The Application is allowed.

2/3

B) In the event of arrest of the applicant in C.R. No. 1040 of 2025 registered at Sakinaka Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), she be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety 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 cooperate in the investigation.

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