Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra

Mr. A. R. Metkari, APP, for the Respondent-State. Mr. Advait Uday Shukla i/b Vikrant Shinde, for the Intervenor. P.S.I. S. B. Shaikh, Vishrantwadi Police Station, Pune City, present.

¶15

CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED: 03 OCTOBER 2025

¶16

PC:-

¶17

Heard Ms. Ankita Ugalmugale, learned Counsel appointed to

¶18

represent the interest of the Applicants, Mr. Shukla, learned Counsel appearing for the Intervenor and Mr. Metkari, learned APP for the Respondent-State of Maharashtra.

¶19

At the outset, it is required to be noted that, earlier by Order dated 19th September 2025, as none has appeared for the Applicants, the matter was directed to be listed on 20th September 2025 under the caption “For Dismissal”. On 20th September 2025

Page 1

Arjun

926-ABA-493-2025.DOC

the matter was kept on 24th September 2025. On 24th September 2025 as none has appeared for the Applicant, Ms. Ankita Ugalmugle, learned Advocate of this Court, is appointed as Amicus Curiae to represent the interest of the Applicants.

¶24

By this Anticipatory Bail Application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the Applicants are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.11 of 2025 registered with the Vishrantwadi Police Station, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶25

Ms. Ankita Ugalmugale, learned Counsel, submitted that Applicant No.1 is a senior citizen of 60 years and Applicant No.2 is a lady of 55 years. She submits that the Applicants are Accused Nos.2 and 3 and they are not the beneficiaries in the incident in question. She submits that Accused No.1 - Tushar Dhananjay Karkhanis has already arrested. She further submits that Applicant No.3 i.e. Accused No.4 - Rohit Dhananjay Karkhanis, has already

¶26

been arrested during the pendency of this Anticipatory Bail Application. Therefore, the present Application survives only for

Page 2

Arjun

926-ABA-493-2025.DOC

Applicant No.1 - Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis (Accused No.2) and Applicant No.2 - Nutan Laxman Karkhanis (Accused No.3). She submits that these Applicants have not made any promises to the victims and therefore they are entitled to be released on bail. She further submits that the Charge-sheet has already been filed and the investigation is complete.

¶31

On the other hand, Mr. Metkari, learned APP and Mr. Shukla, learned Counsel for the First Informant, submit that the offence is very serious where the allegation is that Applicant No.1 i.e. Accused No.2 - Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis, represented to the First Informant that his son-Accused No.1 - Tushar Dhananjay Karkhanis is serving in the HR Department of Coal India Company as a higher official in management and therefore if an amount of Rs.16,00,000/- was paid, the son of the First Informant would be employed in the Coal India Company. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.25,000/- and thereafter Rs.2,25,000/- were paid to the Applicant No.1 - Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis. Subsequently, an amount of Rs.13,00,000/- has been transferred in the account of Accused No.1 - Tushar Dhananjay Karkhanis. Both of them submitted that fabricated letter allegedly issued by Coal India Ltd.

Page 3

Arjun

926-ABA-493-2025.DOC

was provided to the First Informant allegedly issued in the name of the First Informant’s son and also fabricated plane tickets for the purpose of attending medical examination allegedly proposed to be conducted by said Coal India Ltd. were provided and thereafter it was informed to the First Informant that said medical examination was cancelled. Thereafter, the First Informant came to know that said appointment order purported to have been issued by Coal India Company and plain tickets were forged and fabricated.

¶36

Both of them therefore submitted that the Applicants are involved in the crime.

¶37

Perusal of the record shows that as far as the crime i.e. CR No.11 of 2025 registered with the Vishrantwadi Police Station, Pune City is concerned, there are 10 victims from whom such huge amount have been accepted by the Accused. There are other two cases, namely CR No.315 of 2025 registered with the Dighi Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad, for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the allegations are concerning commission of same offence. There is also one more FIR being FIR No.142 of

Page 4

Arjun

926-ABA-493-2025.DOC

2024 registered with the Khadki Police Station, Pune, related to similar allegations.

¶42

Thus, it is the allegation that there are a total of 12 victims and modus operandi involves collecting the huge amounts by assuring that victims would get employment in Coal India Ltd. and thereafter issuing forged and fabricated appointment letters and also fabricated plain tickets.

¶43

Although it is submitted that the Charge-sheet is filed, as far as the Applicants are concerned i.e. Applicant No.1 - Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis (Accused No.2) and Applicant No.2 - Nutan Dhananjay Karkhanis (Accused No.3), the Charge-sheet has not been filed and they have been shown as absconding.

¶44

Perusal of the record shows that the Applicants are involved in very serious crime and under the pretext that employment would be given to the victims in Coal India Company, Kolkata, huge amounts have been accepted and in fact forged and fraudulent appointment letters of Coal India Company as well as forged flight tickets, have been provided to the victims.

Page 5

Arjun

926-ABA-493-2025.DOC

Although it is the contention of Ms. Ankita Ugalmugale, learned Advocate appointed to represent the interest of the Applicants, that Applicant No.1 - Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis has not received any amount, however, the material on record shows that he is the main Accused and has accepted part of the amount. Therefore, Applicant No.1 cannot be granted the protection of anticipatory bail.

¶49

However, Ms. Ankita Ugalmugale, learned Counsel is right as far as Applicant No.2 - Nutan Dhananjay Karkhanis is concerned. The material on record shows that her role is not major and she is a lady of 55 years. Perusal of the record does not show that she played a major in the crime. Accordingly, the case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the Applicant No.2 - Nutan Dhananjay Karkhanis.

¶50

However, perusal of the record shows that the Applicant No.1 - Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis is involved in the crime and custodial interrogation is necessary.

¶51

In view thereof, the following Order is passed:

Page 6

Arjun

926-ABA-493-2025.DOC

O R D E R

(a) Anticipatory Bail Application of the Applicant No.1 - Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis in connection with CR No.11 of 2025 registered with the Vishrantwadi Police Station, Pune is rejected.

¶57

(b) In the event of arrest of the Applicant No.2 - Nutan Dhananjay Karkhanis, in connection with CR No.11 of 2025 registered with the Vishrantwadi Police Station, Pune, she be released on bail on her furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

¶58

(c) The Applicant No.2 shall attend the concerned Police Station, once in a week i.e. on every Monday, between 11:00 am to 02:00 pm till filing of the Charge-sheet and shall cooperate with the investigation.

¶59

(d) The Applicant shall furnish her cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto.

¶60

(e) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

Page 7

Arjun

926-ABA-493-2025.DOC

inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

¶65

(f) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner.

¶66

(g) The Applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

¶67

The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶68

This Court places on record its appreciation for the assistance rendered by Ms. Ankita B. Ugalmugale, who has been appointed as Amicus to represent the interest of the Applicants. The High Court Legal Services Authority to pay her fees as per the rules.

¶69

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶70

Page 8

¶71

Arjun

Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhananjay Laxman Karkhanis and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra

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

Shri Sachin Gorakshanath Shirse vs Sau. Shital Sachin Shirse

Ashwini Shreyas Desai vs Shreyas Shrikant Desai and Ors.

Sonam Yash Sale vs Yash Sanjay Sale

Atul Projects India Private Limited vs State of Maharashtra

Raju Subhas Koli vs Hari Vithoba Mali

Shri Raju Subhas Koli vs Shri Hari Vithoba Mali