Partly allowed

Sambhaji Gopal Patil v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Jan 2024ABA/1959/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail applications arising from FIR alleging sale of informant's plot using forged documents and an impostor. Court granted anticipatory bail to applicant who merely signed as witness without identifying parties; rejected bail for two identifying witnesses whose custodial interrogation was necessary.

What did the court decide?

Amit Kishor Berlekar released on bail on PR bond of Rs.30,000 with sureties in like amount upon arrest; bail applications of Raju Mane and Sambhaji Patil rejected.

Sambhaji Gopal Patil Vs State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

 27.aba-754-23-1959-22.odt

¶2

 : 1 :

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.754 OF 2023

¶5

1. Amit Kishor Berlekar, &
2. Raju Daulat Mane..... Applicants
 Versus
The State of Maharashtra.... Respondent

¶6

WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1959 OF 2022

¶7

Sambhaji Gopal Patil ….Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ….Respondent

¶8

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi, Advocate i/b. Shivani S. Kondekar, for the
Applicants in ABA/754/2023.

¶9

Mr. Dheeraj Patil, Advocate i/b. Tejas Hilage, for the Applicant
in ABA/1959/2022.

¶10

Ms. Pallavi N. Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent-State.

¶11

CORAM: SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

¶12

DATE: 03rd JANUARY, 2024

¶13

1 of 6

¶14

Deshmane (PS)

¶15

 : 2 : 27.aba-754-23-1959-22.odt

¶16

P.C. :

¶17

1.Both these Applications are decided by this

¶18

common order because they arise out of the same subject
offence.

¶19

2.The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in
connection with C.R. No.91/2022 registered at Gokul-
Shirgaon police station, District-Kolhapur on 13.5.2022 under
Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with 34 of IPC.

¶20

3.Heard Shri Satyavrat Joshi, learned counsel for the
Applicants in ABA No.754/2023, Shri Dheeraj Patil, learned
counsel for the Applicant in ABA No.1959/2022 and Ms.
Pallavi Dabholkar, learned APP for the Respondent-State.

¶21

4.The FIR is lodged by one Urmila Sayajirao
Salunkhe. She has stated that she had purchased a plot No.21
at village Kaneriwadi admeasuring 119 sq.mtrs. She has
purchased that plot through a registered document in the year

¶22

2 of 6

¶23

 : 3 : 27.aba-754-23-1959-22.odt

¶24

2010. Her name was entered through a Mutation Entry
No.3781 in the records. She came to know that on 29.4.2019
a document purported to be a sale-deed, was registered in
respect of the same plot wherein it was mentioned that the
first informant had sold that plot to one Asha Patil. That
document was registered at Registration No.3039/2019.
While registering that document, the accused wrongly
identified her and had used a forged Aadhar Card. Instead of
the first informant, an impostor was made to attend the
registration process. Even thereafter the same plot was sold
on 15.6.2021 by the said Asha Patil to Parshuram Kamble and
that sale deed was registered vide registration No.4831/2021.
Thus, the informant was prejudiced by all these forged
documents. The accused interfered with her legitimate right.
On this basis, the FIR was lodged.

¶25

5.Learned counsel for the Applicants submitted that
the Applicants were merely the witnesses. They were not the
real beneficiaries. They identified the parties through their
identifying documents in the nature of Aadhar Card. They had

¶26

3 of 6

¶27

 : 4 : 27.aba-754-23-1959-22.odt

¶28

not forged any identification documents and, therefore, they
are not responsible.

¶29

6.Learned APP opposed this application and
produced the investigation papers before me which contain
two registered sale deeds in question.

¶30

7.I have considered these submissions and I have
perused the copies of the concerned documents. The first
informant was represented through an impostor in the year
2019. The sale deed was executed on 29.4.2019 and it was
registered on the same day. The document shows that the
Applicant Raju Mane and Sambhaji Patil have signed the
registration document by stating that they were personally
knowing the parties executing the document. Thus, both of
them have identified the impostor as the real owner. That
statement implicates them. As far as the Applicant Amit
Berlekar is concerned, he has signed that document as one of
the witnesses. He has not identified the parties, who had
executed the document. Therefore, to that extent benefit can
be given to the Applicant Amit Berlekar.

¶31

4 of 6

¶32

 : 5 : 27.aba-754-23-1959-22.odt

¶33

8.The other document executed in the year 2021
also bears the signature of the Applicant Sambhaji Patil
whereby the same plot was sold by Asha Patil to Parshuram
Kamble. Thus, his signature as an identifying witness appear
on two forged documents.

¶34

9.Learned APP pointed out that the Applicant
Sambhaji Patil is brother-in-law of Asha Patil, who is the main
accused. The other Applicants Amit Berlekar and Raju Mane
are his friends as is revealed from the investigation.

¶35

10.Considering the above discussion, at this stage,
benefit can be given to the Applicant Amit Berlekar because he
has not identified the executing parties, but, he has merely
signed as one of the witnesses. However, as far as the other
two Applicants i.e. Raju Mane and Sambhaji Patil are
concerned, they have signed the documents and have
identified the impostor as the real owner and, therefore, their
custodial interrogation is necessary.

¶36

11.Hence, the following order :

¶37

5 of 6

¶38

 : 6 : 27.aba-754-23-1959-22.odt

¶39

ORDER

¶40

(i) In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R.
No.91/2022 registered at Gokul-Shirgaon police
station, District-Kolhapur, the Applicant Amit Berlekar
is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a
PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like
amount.

¶41

(ii) The Application for anticipatory bail preferred by other two Applicants, namely, Raju Mane and Sambhaji Patil, is rejected.

¶42

(iii) The Applications stand disposed of accordingly.

¶43

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶44

Digitally signed by PRADIPKUMARPRAKASHRAODESHMANE PRADIPKUMARPRAKASHRAODESHMANEDate: 2024.01.0812:25:36 +0530 Deshmane (PS)

¶45

6 of 6

Sambhaji Gopal Patil v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sambhaji Gopal Patil 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

Seema Amruta Keswad Vs State of Maharashtra

Priyanka Sidheshwar Gurav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amit Harilal Sharma Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mohd Taswar Qureshi Vs State of Maharashtra

Mrs Usha Mahesh Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shantaram Mahadev Tupe Vs State of Maharashtra