Prashant Murlidhar Raje vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2026)

Prashant Murlidhar Raje vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

In the event of arrest in C.R. No.469 of 2024 (Mahim Police Station) for Sections 420, 409, 406 IPC and Section 3 MPID Act, release on anticipatory bail on executing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety or two sureties in the like amount; applicant to attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and cooperate in the investigation.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, apprehending arrest in Crime No.469 of 2024 registered at Mahim Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 and 406 IPC and Section 3 MPID Act, should be released on anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail granted: the Court was inclined to release the applicant considering that, in terms of its 1 October 2024 order, he had deposited the amount in the first informant's bank account, and considering the delay of more than four years in lodging the FIR.

Ratio / Principle

Bail made conditional on the applicant attending the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and cooperating in the investigation.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (N.R. Borkar, J., dated 17.01.2026) allows Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2658 of 2024 by Prashant M. Raje, a Share Broker apprehending arrest in Crime No.469 of 2024, Mahim Police Station, for offences under Sections 420, 409 and 406 IPC and Section 3 of the MPID Act, arising from an allegation that he defrauded the first informant and her husband of Rs.28 Lakhs on a promise of good returns. The grant rests on the applicant having, in terms of the Court's order dated 1 October 2024, deposited the amount in the first informant's bank account, and on the delay of more than four years in lodging the FIR. Release ordered on P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety or two sureties in the like amount, subject to the applicant attending the police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and cooperating in the investigation.

906-aba-2658-24.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2658 OF 2024

Prashant M. Raje …Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

...Respondents.

Adv. Sofiya Shaikh a/w. Adv. Mohammed Ahmed Shaikh and Adv. Anchal Meena for the Applicant.

Mr. S.R. Shinde, B-Panel Counsel for the Respondent/State. Adv. Nishi Singhvi for the Respondent No.2. PI Anil Jadhav, Mahim Police Station is present.

………….. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 17.01.2026.

P.C. :

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.469 of 2024 registered at Mahim Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act (MPID Act).

It is the case of the prosecution that the present applicant, who was working as a Share Broker, had promised the first informant and her husband good returns on their investment and defrauded them to the tune of Rs.28 Lakhs.

1/3

Dinesh S. Sherla

906-aba-2658-24.doc

4. On 1^st October 2024, this Court passed the following order:

“Leave to add first informant as party respondent to this application. Amendment be carried out forthwith. After amendment is carried out, issue notice to the newly added respondent.

2. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the dispute is civil in nature. The applicant has received Rs.16,00,000/- from the informant and returned Rs.12,75,000/-. The applicant, to show his bonafides, is ready to deposit Rs.2,00,000/- within two weeks from today, with the remaining amount to be paid within four weeks from today.

3. There shall be no coercive action against the applicant until the next scheduled date. 4. Stand over to 25 October 2024”.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in terms of the above order the applicant has deposited the amount in the bank account of the first informant. Apart from it, there appears to be delay of more than four years in lodging the FIR. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. In the result the following order is passed.

ORDER

A) The Application is allowed.

B) In the event of arrest of the applicant in C.R. No.469 of 2024 registered at Mahim Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 and 406 of the IPC and

2/3

Dinesh S. Sherla

906-aba-2658-24.doc

Section 3 of the MPID Act, he be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety or two sureties in the like amount.

C) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall cooperate in the investigation.

[N.R.BORKAR, J.]

3/3

Dinesh S. Sherla