Abhijeet Narendra Kate v. State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
Nine applicants - Panjabi family members (Jitendra, Naresh, Raju and Moti of Elephanta Realty/Rama Group), Kiran and Uday Thatte with Mahesh Gadgil, Prakash Chajjed (Vardhaman), Abhijeet Kate and Sandeep Pawar - received conditional anticipatory bail (PR bond Rs.2 lakh each plus sureties) in Pune FIR CR 149/2025 charging BNS 111 (organised crime/land grabbing), 318(4) and 61(2). The Bombay High Court bench ruled the Survey No.99 Tathawade dispute 'mainly of civil nature' given pending suits Spl.C.S.54/1998 and Spl.C.S.1068/2024, found the Elephanta agreement's decree-linked possession clause inconsistent prima facie with land grabbing, yet flagged the Service Agreement clause promising favourable revenue/High Court orders as 'totally illegal'; all conclusions expressly prima facie for bail purposes.
What did the court decide?
Conditional anticipatory bail granted to all applicants (accused nos. 1, 2, 4, 9-11, 17, 18, 19) in C.R. No.149 of 2025: in the event of arrest, release on furnishing a P.R. Bond of Rs.2,00,000/- each with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount; conditions - attend Lashkar Police Station as called by the IO and cooperate; hand over documents concerning the subject land and other required documents within two weeks; furnish and update mobile number and residential address; no inducement, threat or promise to dissuade any person from disclosing facts; no tampering with prosecution evidence and no contacting or influencing the complainant or witnesses; no leaving India without prior permission of the learned Trial Court/concerned Sessions Court. With disposal of the ABAs, nothing survives in the Interim Applications and they stand disposed of.