Vimal Gordhan Savalia And ANR v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 142 OF 2026 1.
Vimal G. Savalia 2.
Vinubhai R. Talaviya ...Applicants V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent.
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 319 OF 2026 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 142 OF 2026 Ravindra R. Patil ...Applicant/Intervener.
In the matter between Vimal G. Savalia & Anr.
...Applicants V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondents.
..............
Mr. Ashutosh Gole for the Applicants in ABA.
Mr. V.N. SAgare, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Virendra V. Pethe for the Applicant/Intervener. ..............
CORAM
:
N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE :
04.03.2026.
P.C. :
1.
This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2.
The applicants are apprehending their arrest in Crime No.730 of 2025 registered at Khadakpada Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
1/3
3.
The allegations against the applicants are of preparing false documents in relation to plot owned by Smt. Chandrakala Chaudhary and others in respect of which they executed power of attorney in favour of the first informant.
4.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, the learned APP for the respondent/State and the learned counsel for the intervener/first informant.
5.
The learned counsel for the applicants submits that suit was filed by Smt.Chandrakala Chaudhary and others in respect of plot in question. It is submitted that similar allegations were made in the suit. It is submitted that the applicants were found to be lawful owner of the plot in question and thus the suit was dismissed. It is submitted that first appeal and second appeal filed by the said Smt. Chandrakala Chaudhary and others against the judgment and decree of the trial Court came to be dismissed. It is submitted that, thus, with ulterior motive false allegations are made against the applicants.
6.
On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State submits that the applicants are involved in serious offence of forgery. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the applicants may not be released on anticipatory bail. 7.
The filing of suit in respect of plot in question is not disputed. I have perused the FIR. Prima facie, the dispute between the 2/3
parties appears to be of civil nature. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to release the applicants on anticipatory bail. In the result, the following order is passed.
ORDER
A) The Application is allowed.
B) In the event of arrest of the applicants in C.R. No.730 of 2025 registered at Khadakpada Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with 34 of the IPC, they be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety or two sureties in the like amount.
C) The Application is disposed of accordingly.
8.
Pending Interim Application, if any, shall stand disposed of. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3