Rajesh Bhimrao Ghongade v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Rajapeth, Amravati Tq. And Dist. Amravati

1 3aba277.2026..odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 277 OF 2026 (Rajesh Bhimrao Ghongade Vs. The State, thr PSO, PS Rajapeth, Amravati) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.

Mr. S.K. Kale, Advocate for applicant.

Ms. M.R. Kavimandan, APP for non-applicant /State. CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS , J.

ATE : 15.04.2026 Heard.

2.

Apprehending arrest, the applicant has preferred this application for anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 75 of 2026, dated 5.2.2026, registered with the Police Station Rajapeth, Amravati, for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The applicant is the only accused in the FIR. The learned counsel for the applicant has contended that initially, he approached the District and Sessions Judge, Nagpur for transit anticipatory bail, which came to be allowed vide order dated 25.3.2026. Thereafter, the applicant has again approached the District and Sessions Judge, Amravati for anticipatory bail which came to be rejected vide order dated 7.4.2026.

2 3aba277.2026..odt 4.

According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the transaction between the parties is purely commercial in nature, therefore, no custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. 5.

The learned APP has contended that the applicant was directed to cooperate with the Investigating Agency, vide order dated 25.3.2026. However, he has not cooperated and thus, prayed for dismissal of the application.

6.

Issue notice to the non-applicant, returnable on 22.4.2026. 7.

The learned APP waives notice on behalf of the nonapplicant. 8.

With the assistance of the learned counsels for the respective parties, I have gone through the record. Perusal of the FIR shows that the applicant was dealing in extracting oil from seeds, and in that context, he had promised to the complainant that he would be paid his share of the profit if a certain amount was invested. The informant has invested a certain amount and from time to time, has also received his share of profit. It is the case of the complainant that initially he received the amount but thereafter the applicant stopped paying his share of the profit and has therefore, committed an offence under Section 406 of the IPC.

3 3aba277.2026..odt 9.

Perusal of the FIR, prima facie, shows that the dispute between the parties is purely of commercial nature, as such, immediate custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be required. In that view of the matter, the following order is passed.

ORDER

i) In the event of arrest, in connection with Crime No. 75 of 2026, dated 5.2.2026, registered with Police Station Rajapeth, Amravati, for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicant be released on ad-interim bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount.

ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on the 18th and 19th of this month, between 10.00 Hrs to 12.00 Hrs.

iii) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigating agency and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or influence witnesses.

iv) The applicant shall not leave the India without the previous permission of the Court.

(RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.)