Anil O. Khandelwal v. State Of Maharashtra

Ajay IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1418 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4995 OF 2024 Anil O. Khandelwal .. Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................

 Ms. Dhruti P. Chheda a/w. Mr. Ankit H. Pandey, Advocates for Applicant.

 Mr. Dinesh J. Haldankar, APP for Respondent - State. ....................

CORAM

: MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : APRIL 09, 2025.

P.C.:

1.

Not on Board. Mentioned. Taken on production Board. 2.

Heard Ms. Chheda, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Haldankar, learned APP for Respondent - State. 3.

Present Interim Application is filed by the Applicant who was granted bail by order dated 25.02.2025 for seeking extension of time by 6 weeks for furnishing the sureties as directed to be furnished in the bail order and additional prayer is made for furnishing the same sureties which have been filed by the Applicant in respect of other bail orders concerning the Applicant himself. The details of the said bail orders has been also considered by the Court while granting bail in the order dated 25.02.2025 appended at page No.11 of the Application.

4.

Mr. Haldankar, learned APP appears for the Respondent - State in the present Application.

5.

Though a stoic reluctance initially is shown for the purpose of accepting the same sureties prima facie it is not barred in law unless there is a specific order of the Court to preclude the Applicant to file the same sureties and more specifically so in view of the fact that Applicant is indicted in many criminal proceedings and choices of the individuals who may be approached for standing as Applicant's sureties automatically get limited and restricted due to natural reluctance to assist him owing to concern of stigma and damage to personal reputation. There is also another concern which is if the Applicant is unable to fulfill the condition due to reasons stated in the Application, it would prima facie render the bail condition onerous which cannot be the attribute of the Court while passing a bail order. 6.

In that view of the matter, after recording the concern of Mr. Haldankar but while considering the reasons given in paragraph Nos.5 to 13 of the Application, the present Application deserves to be granted. Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b) which read thus:- "a) Grant extension of time by six weeks to the Applicant for furnishing surety pursuant to the bail order dated 25.02.2025 passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 4955 of 2024;

b) Grant leave to the Applicant to furnish the same sureties, namely Ajay Shah and Abhishek Jain, as have already been accepted by the Hon'ble Trial Court in the other FIR bearing C.R. Nos. 40 of 2020 and 33 of 2020 registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Mumbai."

7.

Interim Application is allowed and disposed.

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Ajay by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2025.04.09 19:30:22 +0530 AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE