K. Krishnamurthy v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Jaripatka, Nagpur

2026:BHC-NAG:3921 1 26-aba-11-26.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 11 OF 2026 K. Krishnamurthy Vs. State of Maharashtra ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shri C. F. Bhagwani, Advocate for applicant. Ms. M. A. Kavimandan, APP for non-applicant/State. CORAM :- M. W. CHANDWANI, J.

DATED :- 07.03.2026 The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 771/2024 registered with Police Station Jaripatka, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well learned APP for the State. Perused the case-diary. 3.

It appears that the daughter of the complainant wanted to pursue post-graduation in medical science and therefore, the present applicant who was alleged to be the Chairman of HDC Crims College, Banglore, was contacted by the complainant through Amit Nagdevte for admission of his daughter in MD course. On 02.11.2023 another middleman- Sourav Kulkarni took the complainant to the house of the applicant wherein, the applicant assured admission of the

2 26-aba-11-26.odt daughter of the complainant on payment of Rs.50 lakhs against cancellation of medical seat. An amount of Rs.12 lakhs was transferred to co-accused- Sourav Kulkarni. However, it appears that again an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- was taken by Sourav Kulkarni from the complainant. On 11.12.2023, Rs.10 lakhs was transferred to the account of the applicant. Thus, the complainant from time to time, paid an amount of Rs.70 lakhs to the applicant and other co-accused but still could not get admission for his daughter. Therefore, on his complaint, the aforesaid offences were registered against the applicant and other co-accused.

4.

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has repaid the entire amount to the complainant. The details of the said refund have been mentioned by the applicant in para no. 4, page no. 4 of the present application. Thus, it appears that the daughter of the complainant could not get a medical seat as promised. It also appears from the present application filed by the applicant on affidavit that the entire amount of Rs.70 lakhs has been repaid to the complainant by the applicant. Whether the alleged act of the applicant amounts to cheating or not is a matter of trial.

5.

Considering these aspects, nothing is required to be seized from the present applicant, since the entire amount has been repaid by the applicant to the

3 26-aba-11-26.odt complainant. The applicant was protected by ad-interim order of this Court vide order dated 12.01.2026 and directed to appear before the concerned Police Station. Accordingly, the applicant appeared before the concerned Police Station and co-operated in the investigation. 6.

In view of the above, a case is made out for confirmation of the ad-interim protection granted to the applicant. Hence, the following order:- i) The application is allowed.

ii) The order dated 12.01.2026 granting adinterim protection to the applicant is hereby confirmed. iii) The applicant to appear before the concerned Police Station as and when directed by the Investigating Officer and co-operate in the investigation. iv) If the statement made by the applicant regarding repayment of Rs.70,00,000/- is found to be false, it would entail for cancellation of bail at the instance of the State.

(M. W. CHANDWANI, J.) Signed by: Mr. Rajnesh Jaiswal Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 09/03/2026 19:29:41