Prajyot Prabhakar Chandane vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Prajyot Prabhakar Chandane vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applications neither allowed nor dismissed; matter adjourned. First informant added as respondent no. 2; notice issued returnable on 26 March 2025; till the next date, no coercive steps against the applicants. Final consideration of the anticipatory bail applications deferred to the returnable date.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants in the FIR arising out of alleged evasion of stamp duty on the sale deed executed in their favour.

Court's answer

Liberty granted to the applicants to add the first informant as party respondent no. 2, with the amendment to be carried out forthwith.

Ratio / Principle

Notice ordered to the newly added respondent no. 2 (first informant), returnable on 26 March 2025; the applicants' advocate permitted to serve the newly added respondent by private notice in all permissible modes of service and file affidavit of service before the returnable date.

Key takeaways

Interim protection: in the meanwhile, till the next date, no coercive steps to be taken against the applicants.ratio¶¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction (Rajesh S. Patil, J.) — Anticipatory Bail Applications Nos. 527 and 528 of 2025, Shiladevi Prabhakar Chandane and Prajyot Prabhakar Chandane v. State of Maharashtra. The applications arise from an FIR alleging evasion of stamp duty on a sale deed executed in favour of the applicants in respect of land admeasuring about 2H 11R; the prosecution case is that a structure used as a godown, of about 291.81 sq.mtrs., stood on the land. Counsel for the applicants submitted that they are bona fide purchasers who paid stamp duty on the transaction, are ready to co-operate with the police, have no antecedents, are in peaceful possession of the land used for cultivation, and offered to deposit in Court the amount of stamp duty claimed by the Registrar of Stamps; applicant no. 1 is a senior citizen. The complaint was lodged by the Sub Registrar of Stamp Office at Sangola. The Court granted liberty to add the first informant as party respondent no. 2, issued notice returnable on 26 March 2025 (service by private notice permitted, with affidavit of service), and directed that till the next date no coercive steps be taken against the applicants. Final decision on anticipatory bail deferred to the returnable date.

910-911-ABA-527-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.527 OF 2025

SHILADEVI PRABHAKAR CHANDANE ...APPLICANT VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...RESPONDENT

WITH

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.528 OF 2025

PRAJYOT PRABHAKAR CHANDANE ...APPLICANT VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...RESPONDENT

Adv. P. B. Birajdar for the Applicants. Adv. Nitin B. Patil, APP for the State in ABA/527/2025. Adv. Rutuja A. Ambekar, APP for the State in ABA/528/2025.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 26, 2025

P.C.:

Mr. Birajdar, learned counsel for the applicants seeks liberty

to add the first informant as party respondent no. 2.

2 Liberty is granted as prayed for. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

The present anticipatory bail applications are filed in FIR where the offences arises out the evasion of stamp duty on a document of sale deed executed in favour of the present applicants.

1

Harish

910-911-ABA-527-2025.doc

The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are ready to co-operate with police. The applicants are the bona fide purchasers, who believed the statement of the vendors and purchase the land which is around 2H 11R for a consideration. The stamp duty was accordingly paid. However, it is the case of the prosecution that on the said land, there was a structure (use for the purpose of godown). The said structure is around 291.81 sq.mtrs. Since the applicants have evaded the payment of stamp duty on the said document, the FIR was lodge against the said applicants and the vendor, who is arraigned as accused no. 3. The complaint was lodged by the informant being the Sub Registrar of Stamp Office at Sangola, DistSolapure. The applicant no. 1 is concerned, she is senior citizen and there are no antecedents reported against both the applicants. The applicants are in peaceful possession of the said land and the said land was used for cultivation purpose. However, though the applicants have purchase the land without the structure standing on it, in order to show their bona fide, the applicants are ready to deposit in this Court the amount of stamp duty claimed by the Registrar of Stamps being the defence of payment to be made as stamp duty.

The learned APP submits that the Investigating officer is

not present as he had gone to Uttar Pradesh for investigating in a matter, therefore short adjournment may be granted.

2

Harish

910-911-ABA-527-2025.doc

Considering that the applicants are ready to show their bona fide by willing to deposit the amount of stamp duty claimed by the Registrar of Stamps, notice is required to be issued to the first informant.

Issue notice to the newly added respondent no. 2 returnable on 26 March, 2025 . Apart from Court notice, Advocate for the applicants is permitted to serve the newly added respondent no. 2 by Advocate’s private notice by all permissible modes of service and file affidavit of service before the returnable date.

In the meanwhile, till the next date, no coercive steps be taken against the applicants.

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

Signed by: Harish V. Chaudhari Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 01/03/2025 13:59:36

3

Harish