Manoj Sanwarmanl Mittal v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1784 of 2025 Umesh Armugam Pillay ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
with Interim Application No. 2479 of 2025 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1784 of 2025 Manoj Sanwarmanl Mittal ... Intervenor In the matter between Umesh Armugam Pillay ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
Digitally signed by MAMTA AMAR KALE Date:
2025.07.28 19:19:46 +0530 MAMTA AMAR KALE ---- Dr Abhinav Chandrachud, a/w Mr Janay Jain and Ms Sanskruti Havde, i/b Parinam Law Associates, for the Applicant. Mr Arfan Sait, APP, for Respondent / State.
Mr Amit Bhowmik, a/w Mr Sagar Batavia, for the Intervenor in IA/2479/2025.
PSI Londhe (IO), Wanawadi Police Station, Pune City, is present.
---- Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 28 July 2025
P.C.:
Interim Application No. 2479 of 2025 .
Heard.
2.
For the reasons stated in the intervention application, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). 3.
The interim application stands disposed of accordingly. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1784 of 2025 In view of the order passed in IA No.2479/2025, the applicant to implead the first informant as a party respondent to this application. The applicant to provide a copy of this application and relevant documents to the learned Counsel for the newly added respondent.
2.
The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations namely, that the applicant unilaterally sold Flat Nos.303 and 403 without the knowledge or consent of Nilesh Bajaj or his associates, including the complainant, is wholly unfounded and misleading. In fact, both Nilesh Bajaj and Ankush Mehta, who were duly authorised to represent their respective groups within the AOP firm, had expressly duly executed the sale agreements in favour of Mr and Mrs Malik. These transactions were carried out with their knowledge and
consent. The complainant has deliberately suppressed this material fact at the time of registration of the FIR. The sale consideration amounting to Rs.2,17,50,000/- in respect of Flat No.403 was credited to the account of the AOP firm. The letter dated 14 April 2025, jointly signed and submitted by Nilesh Bajaj and Ankush Mehta to the Investigating Officer, categorically affirms their awareness of and consent to the sale of Flat Nos. 303 and 403. The said letter further acknowledges that the applicant had received certain payments on behalf of the purchaser, Mr Sushant Malik, and had undertaken to return the same. This communication was submitted with the objective of preventing the complainant from misrepresenting facts and falsely implicating the applicant in criminal proceedings. 3.
The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 seeks an accommodation and further seeks leave to file the additional documents, including the written notes of arguments. Leave granted. The learned APP also seeks time as the Investigating Officer is not present.
4.
By consent of the learned Counsel for both the parties and the learned APP, stand over to 14 August 2025. In the meantime, there shall not be any coercive action against the applicant in the present crime till the next date. (R.N. Laddha, J.)