Satish Madan Pawar v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 954 OF 2026 Satish Madan Pawar
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date:
2026.04.21 14:31:25 +0530 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO. 7870 OF 2026 IN BA/954/2026 Bank Of Maharashtra Through Vinod Kumar Tubid
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Sachin Gite, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. B.B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr. V.V. Krishnan i/by. A.A. Dixit in IAST No. 7870 of 2026, Advocate for Complainant.
PI Banake, EOW, Nashik City present.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM
: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 16th APRIL, 2026.
P.C. :
1.
The Complainant has filed Interim Application (St) No. 7870 of 2026 seeking intervention in the present Bail Application. For the reasons stated in the Interim Application, the same is allowed. 2.
Heard learned counsel for the Applicant, learned APP and learned counsel for the complainant/Intervenor.
3.
By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 72 of 2025 registered with Gangapur Police Station, Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
4.
It is prosecution's case that applicant had obtained the loan from Bank of Maharashtra in the name of his wife Vaishali Pawar and relative Sakshi Borse under the scheme of Chief Minister Employment Generation Programme [for short 'CMEGP'], though they were not entitled for the said loan. The Applicant has obtained term loan of Rs.47,50,000/- in the name of his wife and Rs.44,80,000/- term loan (non-stigmatic) in the name of Sakshi Borse. It is alleged that Applicant got Rs.17,50,000/- subsidy on each loan account.
5.
It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that Applicant has deposited subsidy amount of Rs.17,50,000/- each, which was received in the name of Vaishali Pawar and Sakshi Borse. Learned counsel further submitted that Applicant has mortgaged his property for them term loan of Sakshi Borse. Learned counsel further submitted that Applicant has paid the entire term loan amount of Vaishali Pawar. So Applicant has to pay remaining loan amount in the case of Sakshi Borse. Sakshi Borse has mortgaged her property for her term loan. So the said loan is secured. Applicant is behind bars more than six months.
Investigation in completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. Applicant has no antecedents and requested to allow the application. 6.
It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel appearing on behalf of Bank that Applicant in collusion with accused NO.1 i.e. Bank Manager had applied for loan under CMEGP Scheme, though Applicant's wife and his relative were not entitled for the said loan. The Applicant received subsidy on the said amount. Applicant prepared false documents to obtain the loan, which shows his involvement in the crime. If applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application. 7.
I have heard all learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. Admittedly, the applicant had obtained term loan of Rs.47,50,000/- in the name of his wife. He has repaid the term loan of his wife and Applicant has also deposited the subsidy amount of Rs.17,50,000/- each, which was received in the name of Vaishali Pawar and Sakshi Borse. In respect of term loan of Sakshi Borse is concerned, she has mortgaged her property for securing the said loan amount. Applicant has no antecedents. He is behind bars for more than six months. It may take time to conclude the trial as Investigating Officer has not arrested the other accused.
8.
Considering these facts, I pass following order:
ORDER
(i) Bail Application is allowed.
(ii) The Applicant-Satish Madan Pawar be released on bail in Crime No. 72 of 2025 registered with Gangapur Police Station, Nashik, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.
(iii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. (v) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required.
(vi) Bail Application as well as Interim Application are disposed in the aforesaid terms.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)