Sanjeev Kumar Singh and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sanjeev Kumar Singh and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted to the applicants in the event of arrest in Crime No. 432/2023 (Kasarwadavli Police Station), on P.R. bond of Rs. 30,000/- each with one or more sureties of the like amount, subject to conditions (co-operation with investigation and attending the investigating officer when called; no inducement, threat or promise to persons acquainted with the case and no tampering with evidence; furnishing residential addresses, contact numbers and e-mail addresses to the investigating officer); breach would invite cancellation proceedings. Settlement terms recorded: respondent no. 2's one-year undertaking to cancel the two agreements of sale dated 12 September 2023 accepted; deposit of Rs. 54 lakhs withdrawable by the applicants if the cancellation is not completed within one year, or by the first informant with accrued interest if it is completed and the first informant consents to quashing of the FIR. Interim Application No. 2166/2024 also stands disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants (Sanjeev Kumar Singh and another) in connection with Crime No. 432/2023 registered with Kasarwadavli Police Station. +1 more

Court's answer

Having considered the submissions of both sides (including that the entire crime amount was deposited without admitting guilt), the Court is convinced that the custody of the applicants is not necessary.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest in connection with Crime No. 432/2023, the applicants are to be released on bail on furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs. 30,000/- each with one or more sureties each of the like amount.

Key takeaways

Grant of bail is conditioned on the applicants co-operating with the investigation and attending and meeting the investigating officer as and when called for.ratio¶31
The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing the facts, and shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever.ratio¶32
The applicants shall furnish details of their residential addresses, contact numbers and e-mail addresses to the investigating officer.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Rajesh S. Patil, J.; decided 28 April 2025; neutral citation 2025:BHC-AS:19286) allowed the anticipatory bail application of Sanjeev Kumar Singh and another in respect of Crime No. 432/2023 of Kasarwadavli Police Station, Thane City, holding that custody of the applicants was not necessary since the entire alleged crime amount of Rs. 54 lakhs stood deposited in the Court Registry without admission of guilt, and the parties had arrived at a settlement: respondent no. 2 orally undertook, through counsel, to complete within one year the cancellation of two agreements of sale dated 12 September 2023 and to cooperate in quashing of the FIR. Bail ordered in the event of arrest on a personal recognisance of Rs. 30,000/- each with like sureties, subject to conditions of co-operation with investigation, attendance before the investigating officer as called for, abstention from inducement/threat/promise to witnesses and tampering with evidence, and disclosure of residential addresses, contact numbers and e-mail addresses; breach would render the applicants liable to cancellation proceedings. Withdrawal of the deposited amount regulated: if the cancellation is not completed within one year the applicants may withdraw it; if completed within one year and the first informant cooperates with the quashing proceedings, the first informant may withdraw it with accrued interest. Observations confined to the anticipatory bail question; trial Court to proceed uninfluenced. Interim Application No. 2166/2024 likewise disposed of.