Almas Karim Sayyed vs State of Maharashtra

Mr.Ashok Kumar Dubey i/by SAVJ Law Solutions for the Applicant. Mrs. Anuja Gotad, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Anuj Tiwari for the Applicant/Intervenor in IA No.7180/2026

¶11

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

¶12

DATED : 05 MAY 2026

¶13

PC:-

¶14

1

¶15

(502) ABA-896.26.DOCX

¶16

By the present Application, Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail, apprehending her arrest in Crime No. 466 of 2025 (impugned FIR) dated 29 December 2025, registered with the Indira Nagar Police Station, which charges offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶17

The case of the prosecution is that the Applicant along with her husband Kapil Arvind Pathak are involved in a land grabbing scam. In the instant case, the property belonging to Santosh Hegde and Jyoti Hegde was fraudulently sold to Accused No.1 (Ritesh Ramesh Sansare). The said property was thereafter represented to be for sale by the Applicant and her husband to one Neha Dube. The property at the instance of the Applicant, her husband and others involved in the land grabbing scam was sold to Neha Dube by virtue of sale deed bearing Document No.13164/2025 dated 10 November 2025. Upon the informant realizing the fraud played filed the complaint.

¶18

Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that there is no role of the Applicant in the present crime. He submits that the amount of Rs. 50,00,000/which is alleged to be paid by Neha Dube to the Applicant is not towards the consideration of the sale deed but is in respect of professional services rendered by the Applicant to Neha Dube. He refers to an E-mail at page 33 of the paper

¶19

2

¶20

(502) ABA-896.26.DOCX

¶21

book. Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey submits that though the E-mail at page 33 refers to an attachment (i.e. the invoice of the Applicant), the same could not be produced as the Applicant is presently in difficulty due to the present proceedings. He, therefore, submits that the Applicant be granted bail.

¶22

Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant is not the wife of Kapil Arvind Pathak.

¶23

Mrs. Anuja Gotad, learned APP for the Respondent/State, submits that the investigation and more particularly the statement of Neha Dube has revealed the scam and the manner in which the Applicant and her husband have been involved in the land grabbing racket. She has tendered the statement of Neha Dube recorded on 29 January 2026 for perusal of this Court which makes a reference as to how Neha Dube was misled in purchasing the property from Accused No.1 who in fact did not have any right. She submits that the Applicant is involved in similar other offences one such offence is FIR bearing No.471 of 2025. She submits that the said FIR pertains to the similar modus operandi adopted by the Applicant and her husband Kapil Arvind Pathak.

¶24

Mr. Anuj Tiwari, learned Advocate for the Intervener in Interim Application Stamp No.7180 of 2026, submits that it is the Applicant and her husband who induced the Intervener to purchase the proper from the Accused No.1 knowing very well that the Accused No.1 had neither the right nor title to the

¶25

3

¶26

(502) ABA-896.26.DOCX

¶27

said property. He submits that the intervener was systematically defrauded by the Applicant. He submits that the intervener had neither engaged the services of the Applicant as an Advocate nor did the Applicant act as an Advocate. He submits that he amount paid to the Applicant is towards the sale consideration of the property. He submits that claiming the amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- as professional fees, itself indicates the mischievous nature of the Applicant. Mr. Anuj Tiwari submits that the contentions of Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, that the Applicant (Almas Karim Sayyed) is not the wife of Kapil Arvind Pathak, is contrary to the stand taken by the Applicant and Kapil Arvind Pathak before the Sessions Court.

¶28

Prima facie it appears that the Applicant has received huge money from the transaction. The sale deed which is referred in the FIR is a sham document. The allegations are that the Applicant and Kapil Arvind Pathak have conspired to sell the property through Accused No.1, when the Accused No.1 did not have right. The allegations of creating false documents like Pan Cards, Aadhar Cards impersonation are made in the FIR.

¶29

Apparently, the Applicant along with Kapil Arvind Pathak, both of whom claimed to be Advocates, are involved in another FIR bearing 471 of 2025 wherein the allegations are similar and the issue also pertains to land grabbing.

¶30

4

¶31

(502) ABA-896.26.DOCX

¶32

Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations it appears that the Applicant is involved in land grabbing. For the said reason no case for indulgence is made out.

¶33

This Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed.

¶34

Interim Application Stamp No.7180 of 2026, is also disposed of.

¶35

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

¶36

5

Almas Karim Sayyed v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Almas Karim Sayyed v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dr Shailesh Dattatraya Jadhav vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rajkumar Vikas Dongre vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Union of India , through Directorate of Enforcement vs Sanjay Raut

Suresh Turakhia and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sudai Mani Perumal and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Godhumal Narayandas Kishnani and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.