Jafar Khan Majid Khan v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
2026:BHC-AUG:13616
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 480 OF 2026 Jafar Khan Majid Khan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others ...
• Mr. J. V. Patil, Advocate for Applicant • Mr. R. K. Ingole, APP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 - State ...
CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.
DATED : 27.03.2026 PER COURT :
1.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent - State.
2.
The applicant has approached this Court apprehending arrest in connection with FIR No.13 of 2025 dated 07.01.2025 registered with City Police Station, Jalgaon, Taluka and District Jalgaon, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 504, 506, 468 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a Director of Bhumi Ratnam Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. and is not directly involved in the allegations of inducement, which are primarily attributed to the main accused from the Jain family. It is submitted 1/5
that after filing of the charge-sheet, the main accused, namely Manish Jain and Atul Jain, along with one Lalwani, have already been released on bail either by this Court or by the learned Sessions Court. It is further submitted that the entire amount has been repaid to the complainant and, on the basis of such settlement, the main accused have been released on bail. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
4.
As against this, learned APP strongly opposes the present bail application on the ground that the applicant is involved in serious offences of cheating and criminal misappropriation. It is submitted that an amount of Rs.70,00,000/- has been siphoned off by the applicant in connivance with the members of the Jain family, who had induced the complainant to invest in the company on the promise of high returns. It is further submitted that the said company was formed only with an intention to cheat the complainant. The complainant, who is a practicing advocate, had fallen prey to the modus operandi of the main accused, i.e. the Jain family, who acted in connivance with the present applicant and one Lalwani, who were shown as Directors of Bhumi Ratnam Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 5.
Learned APP further submits that, while all other accused persons have been arrested and released on regular bail, the present 2/5
applicant has been absconding since the date of registration of the offence and is evading arrest. It is, therefore, submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary to carry out the investigation from all angles and, hence, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.
6.
I have perused the investigation papers made available by the learned APP, which indicate that the investigation has culminated in filing of the charge-sheet against the arrested accused persons. It appears from the record that the main accused, namely Manish Jain, has been released on regular bail after a settlement was arrived at with the complainant, who had invested an amount of Rs.75,00,000/- at the inducement of the Jain family. The complainant has received not only the principal amount but also interest, aggregating to Rs.99,00,000/-. Relying upon such settlement and the no objection given by the complainant, the learned Sessions Court granted bail to the said accused.
7.
It further appears that, despite the aforesaid circumstances, the application of the present applicant came to be rejected. Be that as it may, the entire amount has already been recovered and paid to the complainant. The investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has been filed before the learned Trial Court. Though the applicant is shown as absconding under Section 299 of the Code of Criminal 3/5
Procedure, 1973, custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary at this stage. The apprehensions expressed by the learned APP, regarding tampering with evidence or causing prejudice to the prosecution case, can be adequately taken care of by imposing stringent conditions. Hence, I am inclined to pass the following order :-
O R D E R
i.
The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed. ii.
In the event of arrest of the Applicant - Jafar Khan Majid Khan, he shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount, in connection with FIR No.13 of 2025 registered with City Police Station, Jalgaon, for the aforesaid offences, subject to the following conditions :
A) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station and report to the Investigating Officer on 01st, 02nd, 08th, 09th, 15th and 16th April, 2026 between 12:00 noon and 02:00 p.m., and thereafter as and when called, till filing of the supplementary charge-sheet, if any.
B) The Applicant shall also cooperate with the investigation.
4/5
C) The Applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner.
D) The applicant shall furnish copies of his Aadhaar Card and PAN Card to the Investigating Officer along with the addresses and mobile numbers of two nearest relatives.
E) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Trial Court.
8.
Needless to state that violation of any of the above conditions shall entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail. 9.
The observations made herein are prima facie and shall not influence the Trial Court while deciding the case on its own merits. 10.
In view of the above, the Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of.
( MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J. ) 5/5