Allowed

Sanjay Parshuram Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC13 Sept 2022ABA/696/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application, the High Court of Bombay allowed the grant of bail, observing that the facts indicated a civil dispute regarding land possession rather than a genuine criminal case, and directed the complainant to pay costs for misusing police machinery.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties; Complainant to pay Rs. 25,000 to Kirtikar Law Library for misusing police machinery.

Sanjay Parshuram Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

1/5

¶2

33.ABA.696.2022 .doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 696 OF 2022

¶5

Sanjay Parshuram Jadhav ..Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondents

¶6

Mr. Niranjan Mogre for the Applicant. Mr. Vikas Shivarkar for the Respondent No.2. Mrs. G. P. Mulekar APP for the respondent-state Mr. Shinde, API, Hadapsar Police Station, Pune is present.

¶7

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

¶8

DATED : 13^th SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

Heard.

¶11

The applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail based on the alleged incident from 02/06/2012 to 19/12/2012.

¶12

The complainant has lodged an FIR on 14/02/2022 alleging that he has purchased the property alongwith other three partners to the extent to 80 gunthas from the applicant. According to him since each of them were entitled for 20 gunthas of land which was not handed over till this date, the offence in question.

¶13

The contentions of the counsel for the applicant are the entire dispute is civil in nature. According to him, the other three partners have already entered into a settlement by registered

1/5

akn

2/5

33.ABA.696.2022 .doc

deed dated 30/06/2015. He would further urge that another settlement was entered into between the applicant and the complainant on 20/08/2014 by a notarized document. In view of the above, according to him the civil dispute is sought to be brought within the arena of police authority and the police machinery is used for settling the property dispute.

¶19

Learned APP assisted by the counsel for the complainant would invite my attention to the fact that out of total holding of land of 100 gunthas by the applicant, 60 gunthas of land was transferred to one Mr. Nitin Kothare on 02/06/2012, 80 gunthas to the applicant and his other three partners on 08/06/2012 and 40 gunthas to Naresh Oswal on 19/12/2012. As such, it is claimed that the applicant has practiced fraud of transferring 80 gunthas of land to the complainant though he was not having holding to that extent.

¶20

It is further claimed that the aforesaid fraudulent act is duly admitted by the applicant in the document entered into between the applicant and other three partners of the complainant executed on 30/06/2015.

¶21

As such, it is claimed that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is warranted.

2/5

akn

3/5

33.ABA.696.2022 .doc

I have appreciated the aforesaid submissions.

¶27

Upon perusal of the sale deed executed in favour of the complainant and his other three partners, the recital does not provide therein for handing of the possession of 20 gunthas land to each of the purchaser including that of the complainant. What was only agreed was to transfer land to the extent of 80 gunthas. Since 02/06/2012, the complainant appears to have kept quiet but for the execution of the registered deed with the applicant on 20/08/2014, which according to the complainant is a disputed document. Apart from above, the other three partners of the complainant have entered into settlement on 30/06/2015 with the applicant/accused.

¶28

In the aforesaid background, from the recitals of both these documents, so also the sale deed allegedly executed in favour of the complainant and three of his partners on 08/06/2012, it is quite apparent that there exists a civil dispute in which the complainant has sought help of the police for either recovery of the amount or recovery of the possession.

¶29

The factual matrix as narrated herein above in no manner justifies the very registration of the offence and custodial interrogation particularly when the issue ought to have been

3/5

akn

4/5

33.ABA.696.2022 .doc

canvassed in the civil suit.

¶35

I am informed that the complainant has already preferred a Special Civil Suit No. 729 of 2015 in which challenge to sale deed dated 19/12/2012 executed by the applicant in favour of Mr. Naresh Oswal was made. In the said suit which is claimed to be pending on the file of Small Causes Court, Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune the prayer of the complainant for grant of temporary injunction was already rejected.

¶36

In the aforesaid background, what can be noticed is the investigation ofÏcer has stepped into inter se civil dispute between the parties.

¶37

In view of the above, in my opinion, the case for confirmation of the ad-interim is made out.

¶38

In the event of arrest of applicant in crime no. 154 of 2022 registered with Hadapsar police station for the offence punishable under sections 420, 464, 465, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC applicant be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs 25,000/with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶39

The applicant shall neither tamper with evidence nor influence the witnesses in any way.

¶40

In the facts and circumstances of the case, it will be

4/5

akn

5/5

33.ABA.696.2022 .doc

appropriate, in my opinion to direct the complainant to pay a cost of Rs.25,000/- to Kirtikar Law Library within a period of four weeks

¶46

from today for misusing the police machinery in the matter.

¶47

The application stands disposed of.

¶48

( NITIN W. SAMBRE)

¶49

ANANTKRISHNANAIK Digitally signedby ANANTKRISHNA NAIKDate: 2022.09.1911:14:38 +0530

¶50

5/5

¶51

akn

Sanjay Parshuram Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Parshuram Jadhav v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parthesh Ravindra Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vrandavani Indrajit Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dilip Kondiba Khade Vs State of Maharashtra

Divyanshu Pradip Giri Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shrikant Vilas Giri Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rekha Suresh Giri and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra