Allowed

Ajay Vishnu Patil v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Dec 2024ABA/2561/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay allowed an anticipatory bail application. The applicant sought bail in a case for cheating and criminal breach of trust. The prosecution conceded that custody was not required as the applicant cooperated with the investigation. The court granted bail upon execution of a bond and furnish of sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing sureties, with conditions not to tamper with evidence.

Ajay Vishnu Patil vs State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: 2024.12.10 01:08:37 Chitra Sonawane. 34-ABA-2561-2024.docx+0530

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Anticipatory Bail Application No.2561 of 2024

¶4

Ajay Vishnu Patil Age: 52 years, Occ.:Architect Residing at :704, 7^th floor, Kishor Villa, Anant Nagrekar Marg, Old Prabhadevi, Mumbai- 400 025

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra at the instance of Dadar Police Station, Mumbai. CR No.80 of 2023

¶8

… Respondent

¶9

Mr Daljeet Singh Bhatia for the applicant. Mr Yogesh Dabke, APP for respondent/State. API Bhagwan Payghan Dadar Police Station, Mumbai.

¶10

Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 9 December 2024.

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

Heard Mr Daljeet Singh Bhatia, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant and Mr Yogesh Dabke, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State.

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

9 December 2024

¶15

Chitra Sonawane. 34-ABA-2561-2024.docx

¶16

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.80 of 2023, registered at Dadar Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471, read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR and shown as a witness. The applicant is not the recipient or the beneficiary of the alleged amount. The only role attributed to the applicant is that he introduced the main accused to the informant. There are no allegations of forgery or breach of trust against the applicant. Further, the applicant has attended the concerned Police Station on multiple occasions, and cooperated with the investigation.

¶18

At the outset, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State, on instructions from the investigating officer, acknowledges that the applicant has attended the concerned Police Station and cooperated with the investigation, and the prosecution does not require his custody.

¶19

Upon perusing the records, it appears that the investigation has concluded, and the learned APP, on instructions, concedes that the applicant has cooperated with

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

9 December 2024

¶22

Chitra Sonawane. 34-ABA-2561-2024.docx

¶23

the investigation by attending the concerned Police Station, and his custody is not required, suggesting the prosecution’s no objection to grant the applicant pre-arrest bail. In these circumstances, the application stands allowed in the following terms:

¶24

(i) In the event of the applicant’s arrest in CR No.80 of 2023, registered at Dadar Police Station, Mumbai, he shall be released on bail upon executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶25

(ii) The applicant, himself or through any other person, shall not indulge in any activity that would tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses.

¶26

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶27

Page 3 of 3

¶28

9 December 2024

Ajay Vishnu Patil v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Vishnu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shrihari Kondaji Shelke vs State of Maharashtra

Panish @ Pangya Ananda Bhosale vs the State of Maharashtra

Abhishek @ Akshay Devidas Nirmal vs the State of Maharashtra

Muktar Mainuddin Kazi and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra

Balveen Kaur Gandhi vs Kamraj Co. Operative Crdit Society Ltd. and Anr.

Bhupinder Singh Anand vs M/S Kamraj Co. Operative Credit Society Ltd. through Miss. Suvarna Prakash Salviand Anr.