Kapil Arvind Pathak 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. Saurabh Raut for the Applicant/Intervener. PSI Santosh S Fuynde, Indiranagar Police Station, Nashik City present.

¶14

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

¶15

DATED : 05 MAY 2026

¶16

PC:-

¶17

1

¶18

(502) ABA-917.26.DOCX

¶19

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

¶20

The case of the prosecution is that the Applicant along with his wife Almas Karim Sayyed 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 wife to one Neha Dube. The property at the instance of the Applicant, his wife 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.

¶21

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 Applicant herein is neither the beneficiary of any amount of the sale deed which is in question nor has the Applicant acted in any manner in the said transaction. He, therefore, submits that the Applicant be granted bail.

¶22

2

¶23

(502) ABA-917.26.DOCX

¶24

Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submitted that the Applicant is not the husband of Almas Karim Sayyed.

¶25

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 his wife 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 in details 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 his wife Almas Karim Sayyed.

¶26

Mr. Saurabh Raut, learned Advocate for the Interverner in Interim Application No.1342 of 2026, submits that the role of the Applicant is clear in the investigation. He submits that the Applicant is involved in the land grabbing with his wife Almas Karim Sayyed. He submits that the Applicant herein has identified Accused No.1 Ritesh Sansare in the sale deed bearing Document No.13164/2025 dated 10 November 2025. He submits that the contentions of Mr. Ashok Kumar Dubey, that the Applicant (Kapil Arvind Pathak) is not the husband of

¶27

3

¶28

(502) ABA-917.26.DOCX

¶29

Almas Karim Sayyed, is contrary to the stand taken by the Applicant and Almas Karim Sayyed before the Sessions Court..

¶30

Prima facie it appears that the Applicant is instrumental in creating false documents i.e. sale deed. The sale deed which is referred in the FIR is a sham document. The allegations are that the Applicant and Almas Karim Sayyed 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.

¶31

Apparently, the Applicant along with Almas Karim Sayeed, 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. In addition, the Applicant herein is involved in one more FIR bearing No.259 of 2024 as stated by Mrs. Anuja Gotad, learned APP for the Respondent/State.

¶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

4

¶35

(502) ABA-917.26.DOCX

¶36

In view of dismissal of Anticipatory Bail Application, Interim Application No.1342 of 2026 does not survive and the same is also disposed of.

¶37

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

¶38

5

Kapil Arvind Pathak v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil Arvind Pathak 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.

Almas Karim Sayyed vs State of Maharashtra

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