Allowed¶22

Praveen Krishnaiah v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC19 Jun 2025ABA/1403/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Praveen Krishnaiah v. State of Maharashtra, Anticipatory Bail Application No.1403 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Bombay, decided 15 October 2025 by N.R. Borkar, J. Anticipatory bail allowed in Crime No.526 of 2024, MIDC Police Station, under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) IPC; alleged fraud of Rs.12,00,000/- over non-delivery of Mongolian Yurt tents; Court held dispute prima facie civil in nature; release on PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest in Crime No.526 of 2024 (MIDC Police Station, Sections 406 and 420 IPC), the Applicant to be released on a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. ¶22

Praveen Krishnaiah vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

1 925-ABA 1403-25.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1403 OF 2025

¶3

Praveen Krishnaiah … Applicant V/s.

¶4

State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents

¶5

Mr. Nikhil Mengde a/w Haider T., Rahul Kshirgavkar, Shashank Palayala for the Applicant.

¶6

Ms. R. D. Humane, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Umesh S. Iyer for Respondent No.2.

¶7

API Pratibha Patil, MIDC PS is present.

¶8

Digitally signed by MUGDHA MUGDHA MANOJ MANOJ PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2025.10.29 14:41:57 +0530

¶9

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 15TH OCTOBER 2025

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

This is an Application for anticipatory bail.

¶12

The Applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.526 of 2024 registered with MIDC Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

It is the case of the prosecution that on 13^th November 2020, the first informant came across an advertisement posted by the Applicant offering Mongolian Yurt (tents) at competitive price. The allegations against the Applicant are of defrauding the first informant to the tune of Rs.12,00,000/-, which he had allegedly paid to the Applicant towards purchase of the said tents.

¶14

I have heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2-first informant.

¶15

1 of 2

¶16

Mugdha

¶17

2 925-ABA 1403-25.doc

¶18

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the dispute between the parties, if any, is purely of civil in nature. It is submitted that the tents were not delivered as the first informant had failed to pay part of the consideration amount. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation and the Applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation.

¶19

On the other hand, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and the Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2-first informant submits that though the first informant had paid the amount of Rs.12,00,000/- to the Applicant, the tents were not delivered as the intention of the Applicant was to cheat the first informant. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the Applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.

¶20

I have perused the FIR. Prima facie, the dispute between the parties appears to be of civil in nature. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to release the Applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

i. The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

¶23

ii. In the event of the arrest of the Applicant in Crime No.526 of 2024 registered with MIDC Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a PR Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶24

The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶25

(N.R. BORKAR, J.)

¶26

2 of 2

¶27

Mugdha

Praveen Krishnaiah v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen Krishnaiah v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pallavi Dalmia (Nee Pallavi Agarwal) vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shivani Shantanu Chand Nee Shivani Tibrewala vs Shantanu Chand

Milind Baban Kadlag vs Nikita Milind Kadlag and Anr.

Vinod Vijay Ghodvinde vs Harshali Vinod Ghodvinde

Manish Vinod Ringasia vs Aarti Manish Ringasia Alias Aarti Bimal Sharma

Suresh Nainmal Rughani vs Kirti Vikram Rughani and Ors.