Bombay High Court

VIMAL GORDHAN SAVALIA AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 4 March 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: N R BORKAR

Holding

The Court held that, as the dispute is essentially civil, anticipatory bail may be granted notwithstanding the alleged offences.

Summary

The applicants, Vimal G. Savalia and Vinubhai R. Talaviya, filed an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in Crime No.730 of 2025 for alleged offences under IPC Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 read with 34, relating to alleged preparation of false documents concerning a plot owned by Smt. Chandrakala Chaudhary. The applicants contended that a civil suit over the plot had been decided in their favour, with the suit and subsequent appeals dismissed, and that the criminal allegations were a false, ulterior‑motived attempt to harass them. The State argued that the alleged forgery offences were serious and that anticipatory bail should not be granted. The Court examined the FIR and observed that the dispute appeared to be essentially civil in nature, and therefore inclined to grant bail. Consequently, the Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, directing the applicants to execute a personal bond of Rs.25,000 each with one or two sureties, and disposed of the application.

Issues considered

What is the nature of the dispute underlying the alleged offences – civil or criminal?
Does the alleged commission of offences under IPC Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 and 34 preclude the grant of anticipatory bail under CrPC Section 438?

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 420, 465, 468, 471

Subjects

anticipatory bail
forgery
IPC
CrPC
civil dispute
bail bond

Judgment

                                                          6-aba-142-26 @ia-319-26.odt


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
        ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 142 OF 2026

1.   Vimal G. Savalia
2.   Vinubhai R. Talaviya                                …Applicants
     V/s.
The State of Maharashtra                                 ...Respondent.
                            WITH
             INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 319 OF 2026
                             IN
        ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 142 OF 2026

Ravindra R. Patil                             …Applicant/Intervener.
     In the matter between

Vimal G. Savalia & Anr.                                  …Applicants
     V/s.
The State of Maharashtra                          ...Respondents.
                              …………..
Mr. Ashutosh Gole for the Applicants in ABA.
Mr. V.N. SAgare, APP for the Respondent/State.
Mr. Virendra V. Pethe for the Applicant/Intervener.
                              …………..

                                CORAM         :    N.R. BORKAR, J.
                                DATE          :    04.03.2026.

P.C. :

1.       This is an application for anticipatory bail.


2.       The applicants are apprehending their arrest in Crime No.730
of 2025 registered at Khadakpada Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with 34 of
the Indian Penal Code (IPC).




Dinesh S. Sherla                        1/3
                                                         6-aba-142-26 @ia-319-26.odt


3.       The allegations against the applicants are of preparing false
documents in relation to plot owned by Smt. Chandrakala
Chaudhary and others in respect of which they executed power of
attorney in favour of the first informant.


4.       I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant,
the learned APP for the respondent/State and the learned counsel
for the intervener/first informant.


5.        The learned counsel for the applicants submits that suit was
filed by Smt.Chandrakala Chaudhary and others in respect of plot
in question. It is submitted that similar allegations were made in
the suit. It is submitted that the applicants were found to be lawful
owner of the plot in question and thus the suit was dismissed. It is
submitted that first appeal and second appeal filed by the said
Smt. Chandrakala Chaudhary and others against the judgment
and decree of the trial Court came to be dismissed. It is submitted
that, thus, with ulterior motive false allegations are made against
the applicants.


6.       On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State
submits that the applicants are involved in serious offence of
forgery. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the
applicants may not be released on anticipatory bail.


7.       The filing of suit in respect of plot in question is not disputed.
I have perused the FIR. Prima facie, the dispute between the


Dinesh S. Sherla                        2/3
                                                           6-aba-142-26 @ia-319-26.odt


parties appears to be of civil nature. In that view of the matter, I
am inclined to release the applicants 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 applicants in C.R. No.730
         of 2025 registered at Khadakpada Police Station for the
         offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471
         read with 34 of the IPC, they be released on bail on
         executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one
         surety or two sureties in the like amount.


         C)        The Application is disposed of accordingly.


8.       Pending Interim Application, if any, shall stand disposed of.




                                                    [N.R.BORKAR, J.]




Dinesh S. Sherla                           3/3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…