Sushant Subhas Petkar v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3527 OF 2025 Sushant Subhas Petkar ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

...Respondents

Mr. Tanmay A. Deshmukh i/b. Mr. Pavan S. Patil, for the Applicant. Ms. R. V. Newton, APP, for the Respondent-State. Ms. N. S. Khaire, WPSI, attached to Ravet Police Station, Pune, present.

CORAM:

MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATED :

22nd JANUARY 2026 PC:- 1.

Heard Mr. Deshmukh, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and Ms. Newton, learned APP for the Respondent No.1. 2.

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.470 of 2025 registered with Ravet Police Station, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

As per the prosecution case, total amount of Rs.2,18,00,000/- were paid by the First Informant to the Applicant for investment in share market and out of the said amount, Rs.1,24,87,393/- has not been invested in the share market and has been given by the Applicant to the relatives of the First Informant. The offence is very serious.

4.

It is further significant to note that the Applicant has voluntarily stated before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadgaon-Maval, Pune that he would deposit the said amount of Rs.1,24,87,393/- before the learned Sessions Court, VadgaonMaval, Pune and on that condition, by order dated 1st December 2025, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadgaon-Maval, Pune, has granted protection. However, after obtaining the said order dated 1st December 2025 by making voluntary statement about deposit of the said amount, thereafter, the Applicant has approached this Court stating that the said condition is punitive condition.

5.

At the outset, it is required to be noted that the said statement was voluntarily made by the Applicant. Even the said

statement is ignored, then also the offence is very serious as huge amount of Rs.2,18,00,000/- was obtained from the First Informant by falsely representing that the said amount would be invested in the shares and out of the total amount very substantial amount of Rs.1,24,87,393/- has been paid to his relatives. Thus, in the facts and circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the Applicant is necessary.

6.

Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application dismissed. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Digitally signed by SONALI MILIND PATIL Date:

2026.01.22 19:13:47 +0530 SONALI MILIND PATIL