Santosh Popat Thorat vs State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2026)

Santosh Popat Thorat vs State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail in Crime No. 761 of 2023 (Chaturshringi Police Station, District Pune) on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions: (ii) deposit of passport with the concerned Investigating Officer; (iii) attendance at the concerned police station as and when required; (iv) no tampering with evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case; and (v) if the Rs. 11,00,000/- is deposited, any interested person's application for its withdrawal to be decided by the learned Trial Court on its own merit.

¶order-disposal

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail in Crime No. 761 of 2023 (Chaturshringi Police Station, District Pune) for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 409 IPC and Section 3 of the MPID Act, 1999. +1 more

Court's answer

The applicant is enlarged on bail in Crime No. 761 of 2023 on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions: deposit of his passport with the concerned Investigating Officer; attendance at the concerned police station as and when required; and no tampering with evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

¶order-clause-(i)

Ratio / Principle

On the record, the amounts of the first informant and other investors appear to have been invested in cryptocurrency with the tokens remaining with them, and whether the applicant's conduct amounts to cheating is a matter of evidence to be decided at trial.

Key takeaways

The observations in the order are made only for the purpose of granting bail; the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by those observations.obiter¶10
The applicant's statement (on instructions) that he will deposit Rs. 11,00,000/- before the Trial Court to show bona fides was accepted, but the Court passed no order on that statement; if the amount is deposited and any interested person files an application for its withdrawal, the learned Trial Court shall decide it on its own merit.obiter¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Regular bail — Offences under Sections 420 and 409 IPC and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 — Crime No. 761 of 2023, Chaturshringi Police Station, District Pune — Prosecution case that applicant and co-accused lured the first informant and other investors (April 2021 to 26 October 2023) to invest in cryptocurrency with assurance of handsome returns, and neither amounts nor returns were paid; learned APP contended cheating of more than Rs. 1,09,00,000/-. Applicant's contention: amounts were invested in cryptocurrency, separate accounts and tokens were given to investors, and non-return of amounts was due to market fluctuation, not cheating. Court (Shivkumar Dige, J.) noted the invested amounts appear to have been placed in cryptocurrency with the tokens remaining with the first informant and investors, and that whether the conduct amounts to cheating is a matter of evidence; applicant already in custody for almost two years with no progress in trial. Bail granted on P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, with conditions (deposit of passport with the Investigating Officer; attendance at the police station as required; no tampering with evidence or contact with complainant/witnesses). Applicant's offer to deposit Rs. 11,00,000/- to show bona fides was accepted but the Court passed no order on that statement; withdrawal applications, if any, left to the Trial Court. All observations confined to the bail purpose; trial to proceed uninfluenced by them.

26-BA-2555-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2555 OF 2025

Santosh Popat Thorat ….Applicant versus

The State of Maharashtra and anr. …..Respondents

_________________________________________________________________ Mr. Veerdhaval Kadade, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Balraj B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State.

Mr. Avirat Sonawane, Mr. Prasad Naik and Mr. Pratik Kamble i/b. Mr. S. B. Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 3^rd FEBRUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 761 of 2023 registered with Chaturshringi Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHUBHADA SHANKAR SHANKAR KADAM KADAM Date: 2026.02.09 14:46:38 +0530

It is prosecution’s case that during the period between April 2021 and 26^th October 2023, the applicant and the co-accused lured the first informant to invest amounts in his company with assurance of handsome returns. However, after investing the amount, the applicant did not return the amount nor gave any returns on it.

Page 1 of 4

26-BA-2555-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

It is contention of the applicant that he has not cheated the first informant or other investors. The first informant and investors invested the amount in cryptocurrency. Separate accounts of the first informant and other investors were created. Separate tokens were given in respect of the invested amounts to the first informant and other investors. When the complaint was filed before the police, the applicant had given in writing to the police that if the first informant was ready to return the said token, the applicant was ready to return the amount to the first informant but the first informant was not ready to return the token to the applicant. The allegations against the applicant cannot be considered as a cheating and the first informant not getting the returns as per his wish due to fluctuation in the market, cannot be considered as cheating. The applicant is behind bars for almost two years, there is no progress in the trial and requested to allow the application.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for respondent No.2 -first informant that the applicant persuaded the first informant and other investors to invest the amount in cryptocurrency with assurance of handsome returns, but after investing the amount, they did not get returns on the invested amounts. Though the applicant is seeking return of invested tokens , the price of the token is more than cheated amount. There is cheating of more than Rs. 1,09,00,000/-. If applicant is

Page 2 of 4

26-BA-2555-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.

It appears from the record that the applicant has invested the amount of the first informant and other investors in cryptocurrency. The tokens of the cryptocurrency are with the first informant and other investors. The first informant and investors did not get returns on the invested amount. It appears that the applicant did not use the amount of the first informant and investors but it is invested in cryptocurrency. Whether it amounts to cheating or not, is part of evidence. The applicant is behind bars for almost two years, there is no progress in the trial.

Learned counsel for the applicant, on instructions, submits that the applicant will deposit Rs.11,00,000/- before the Trial Court to show his bona fides. His statement is accepted.

I make it clear that this Court has not passed order on statement of depositing Rs.11,00,000/-.

In view of above, I pass following order :

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in in Crime No. 761 of 2023

registered with Chaturshringi Police Station, District Pune, on

Page 3 of 4

26-BA-2555-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two

sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The applicant shall deposit his passport with the concerned Investigating Officer.

(iii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

(v) If the amount of Rs.11,00,000/- is deposited and any interested

person files application for withdrawal of it, the learned Trial Court shall decide it on its own merit.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

10 It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

Page 4 of 4