Shakil Ahmad Nizamuddin Siddiqui And Others v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Pachpaoli, Nagpur Dist. Nagpur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 416 OF 2026 Abdul Ibrahim Khan and Anr.

...Applicants V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Vijay Kurle a/w Adv. Sonal Manchekar a/w Adv. Vikas Pawar, Mr. Rahul Yadav, Mr. Jayendra Manchekar, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. B. V. Holambe Patil, APP for the Respondent/State.

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

20.02.2026.

P.C. :

1.

This is an application for Anticipatory Bail. 2.

The applicants are apprehending their arrest in Crime No. 224 of 2025 registered at Dahanu Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, & 474 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that the applicants had availed loans of Rs.14,00,000/- and Rs.15,00,000/- from Janta Cooperative Bank Limited and for availing the said loans, the 1/3

applicants had forged the signatures of the first informant as a guarantor to the said loans, though the first informant was out of India during the relevant period.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned APP for the respondent-State.

5.

The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant No.1 and the first informant were good friends. It is submitted that the applicant No.1 stood as a guarantor to the loan availed by the first informant. It is submitted that the false allegations are made against the present applicants with some ulterior motive. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the bank has no grievance in relation to the loans in question. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation and the applicants are ready and willing to co-operate in the investigation.

6.

On the other hand, the learned APP for the respondentState submits that there is a documentary evidence to show that, during the relevant period when the application for loan was 2/3

submitted, the first informant was out of India. It is submitted that the first informant came to know about the alleged forgery when he received the notice from the bank in respect of non-payment of installments by the applicants. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the applicants may not be released on anticipatory bail.

7.

According to the applicants themselves, the first informant was the friend of the applicant No.1. Thus, there appears to be no reason for him to make false allegations. Considering the nature of crime, I am not inclined to release the applicants on anticipatory bail. The application is rejected. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3