Anita Bhushan Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Anita Bhushan Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim protection shall continue until the next date; matter listed on 18/06/2025, with the learned APP directed to make submissions on the returnable date. Final decision on the anticipatory bail application deferred.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Anita Bhushan Patil, is prima facie involved in the offence merely because a portion of the loan amount (approx. Rs.72,24,140/-) was allegedly transferred to her, and whether she merits interim protection in the anticipatory bail application.

Court's answer

Prima facie, from the allegations, the applicant's husband Bhushan Patil appears involved in the offence; however, there is no material on record indicating that the applicant herself is prima facie involved in any part of the transaction or actively participated in deceiving the informant.

Ratio / Principle

Mere receipt of money from her husband, without any further involvement, does not per se establish the applicant's complicity in the alleged offence.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory Bail Application No. 529 of 2025 (High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, Arun R. Pedneker, J., decided 22 April 2025): The applicant's husband allegedly induced the informant to convey 16 shops on a promise of transferring shares of M/s Nirman Gold Alloys Pvt. Ltd. worth Rs.2,30,56,000/- within 20 months and appointing him a Director; the shops were instead mortgaged (loan of Rs.30,00,000/-) and pushed into NCLT liquidation, with neither shares nor properties returned. Approximately Rs.72,24,140/- of the loan amount was allegedly transferred to the applicant, who was therefore arrayed as an accused. The Court held that, prima facie, only the husband appears involved; there is no material indicating the applicant's prima facie involvement or active participation in the deception, and mere receipt of money from her husband does not per se establish her complicity. Interim protection was continued until 18/06/2025, when the learned APP is to make submissions.

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

948 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 529 OF 2025

Anita Bhushan Patil

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra

Advocate for Applicant : Senior Counsel Mr.. R. N. Dhorde a/w Mr. S. S. Dudhane i/b Mr. Dhorde Vikram R. APP for Respondents-State: Mr. N. B. Patil

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. Dated : April 22, 2025.

PER COURT :-

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent–State.

The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that it is alleged that the applicant’s husband, Bhushan Patil, had requested the informant to invest capital in his company, M/s Nirman Gold Alloys Pvt. Ltd., on the promise that the applicant would transfer shares of the said company to the complainant and also appoint him as a Director of the company. The informant informed Bhushan Patil that he could make available his 16 shops to raise the required funds. Bhushan Patil assured the informant that he would transfer his shares worth Rs.2,30,56,000/- from Nirman Gold Alloys Pvt. Ltd. in favour of the informant within 20 months and also appoint him as a Director in the said company.

Pursuant to this understanding, the informant executed a registered sale deed in respect of the said 16 shops in favour of the applicant’s husband, Bhushan Patil. However, Mr. Bhushan Patil subsequently availed a loan of Rs.30,00,000/- against the said properties, and due to certain losses, the shops were brought under liquidation proceedings before the NCLT Mr.

Page 1 of 2

948 ABA 529-2025

Bhushan Patil did not give the promised shares to the informant nor returned the properties to him.

It is further alleged in the complaint that a portion of the loan amount, approximately Rs.72,24,140/-, was transferred to the present applicant, and hence, she has been arrayed as an accused in the present crime.

Prima facie , from the allegations made, it appears that the applicant’s husband, Bhushan Patil, is involved in the offence. However, there is no material on record to indicate that the present applicant is prima facie involved in any part of the transaction or that she actively participated in deceiving the informant. Mere receipt of money from her husband, without any further involvement, does not per se establish her complicity in the alleged offence.

List the matter on 18/06/2025. The leaned APP to make submission on the returnable date.

Interim protection shall continue until the next date.

( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. )

vj gawade/-.

Page 2 of 2