Disposed¶21

Vikram Narsinhlal Ghanshani v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Mar 2025ABA/550/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail interim order; Bombay High Court; ABA No.550/2025; Vikram Narsinhlal Ghanshani v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.; Justice Rajesh S. Patil; dated March 27, 2025; conditional protection from coercive steps upon deposit of Rs.1,25,000/-; alleged brokerage of Rs.2,50,000/- through 'No Broaker' site; Sachin Aswani; DCB Bank respondent no.3; SARFAESI proceedings; society respondent no.2; Chembur police station; IO to contact newly added respondents; next date 29/4/2025 'for urgent circulation'.

What did the court decide?

Interim conditional protection: upon deposit of Rs.1,25,000/- in this Court within two weeks, no coercive steps against the applicant till the next date of hearing; matter stood over to 29/4/2025 under the caption 'for urgent circulation'. ¶21

Vikram Narsinhlal Ghanshani vs State of Maharashtra and… — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant in the anticipatory bail application should be protected from coercive steps/custody, given his offer to cooperate with the investigating agency and the absence of reported criminal antecedents. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the submissions made on behalf of the informant, the applicant is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- in this Court within a period of two weeks.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

If the said sum of Rs.1,25,000/- is deposited in this Court, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant till the next date of the hearing.

¶21

Key takeaways

The Investigating Officer is directed to take steps and contact the newly added respondent nos.2 and 3.ratio¶22
The secretary of respondent no.2 (society) and the Manager of respondent no.3 (Bank) are directed to remain present in this Court on the next date of the hearing.ratio¶23
The order copy is to be communicated to respondent nos.2 and 3 by the IO.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction (Rajesh S. Patil, J.), interim order dated March 27, 2025 in Anticipatory Bail Application No.550/2025 - Vikram Narsinhlal Ghanshani v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. The Court noted that despite service, neither the society (respondent no.2) nor DCB Bank (respondent no.3) was represented, and that the learned APP and the IO were unable to answer queries on the investigation, including efforts to record statements of the building secretary, the watchman and the bank stated to have initiated SARFAESI proceedings. The applicant's counsel submitted that the informant transacted through a free brokerage site named 'No Broaker'; a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- was received as brokerage for the sale of the subject flat, 50% of which was paid to business partner Sachin Aswani; the applicant was ready to cooperate with the investigating agency and no criminal antecedents were reported against him. Held/directed: applicant to deposit Rs.1,25,000/- in this Court within two weeks; on such deposit, no coercive steps against the applicant till the next date of hearing; IO to contact newly added respondent nos.2 and 3 and communicate the order copy to them; secretary of respondent no.2 and Manager of respondent no.3-Bank to remain present on the next date; matter stood over to 29/4/2025 under the caption 'for urgent circulation'.

¶1

Diksha Rane 5 ABA 550-2025.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.550/2025

¶4

VIKRAM NARSINHLAL GHANSHANI ..APPLICANT VS.

¶5

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ..RESPONDENTS

¶6

Adv. Nikhil Mengde a/w. Adv. Kunal Savaskar for applicant. Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP for State. Adv. Maitreya Shukla for intervener. API Ganesh R., Chembur police station.

¶7

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

¶8

DATE : MARCH 27, 2025.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

1. In spite of society – respondent no.2 being served nobody has represented the society today. So also, nobody has appeared for DCB Bank – respondent no.3.

¶11

2. The learned APP is not able to give any answer to the query raised by this Court as regards the investigation being done by the IO. Hence, I have no option but to adjourn the matter. The IO is not able to give answer to simple questions whether he had taken efforts to

¶12

record the statements of the building secretary in which subject flat was situated, watchman of the said building, the bank which

¶13

¶14

Diksha Rane 5 ABA 550-2025.doc

¶15

according to them has initiated the SARFAESI proceedings who is respondent no.3 in the present proceeding.

¶16

3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the informant has done his transaction through a free brokarage cite named “No Broaker”. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is business partner of Sachin Aswani (Soni) the present applicant came in contact of the informant. Along with Sachin Aswani he took efforts to show 2-3 flats in the locality as per requirement of the informant. He submits that a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- was paid to him by the informant as a brokerage for the sale of the subject flat. 50% of the said amount was paid to the business partner Sachin Aswani. He submits that he is ready to cooperate with the investigating agency. The custody of him would not be necessary as there are no criminal antecedents reported against the applicant.

¶17

4. Taking into consideration the submissions made on behalf of the informant suffice would be the purpose if the applicant is directed to deposit in this Court a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- within a period of two weeks from today.

¶18

5. If the said sum of Rs.1,25,000/- deposited in this Court, no

¶19

¶20

Diksha Rane 5 ABA 550-2025.doc

¶21

coercive steps be taken against the applicant till next date of the hearing.

¶22

6. The IO should take steps and contact the newly added respondent nos.2 and 3.

¶23

7. The secretary of respondent no.2 is directed to remain in this Court on the next date of the hearing. So also, the Manager of respondent no.3 – Bank should remain present on the next date of the hearing.

¶24

8. The order copy should be communicated to the respondent no.2 and 3 by the IO.

¶25

9. Stand over to 29/4/2025 under the caption “for urgent circulation” .

¶26

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

¶27

¶28

Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 28/03/2025 12:21:04

Vikram Narsinhlal Ghanshani v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram Narsinhlal Ghanshani v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Nandkishor Dhaku Palav vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Akshaya Ravindra Khedekar vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hemant Chandrashekhar Kadrekar vs Late Shri Syed Anwar Rizvi

Anant Vishnu Bhise vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Suvarna Basawraj Charkai vs the State of Maharashtra

Sharad Vitthal Khanvilkar vs State of Maharashtra