SUNILKUMAR RAM AVADHSINGHversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                                   908-ABA-1801-2026


Harish


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


               ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1801 OF 2026


         Sunilkumar Ram Avadhsingh                                ...Applicant
                    V/s.
         State of Maharashtra                                     ...Respondent

                                   WITH
                    INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3012 OF 2026
                                    IN
               ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1801 OF 2026

         Gurdeep Singh Santhok Ajmani                             ...Applicant
                    V/s.
         State of Maharashtra                                     ...Respondent



         Adv.Veerdhawal Deshmukh with Mr.Ameyprasad Atigre for the Applicant.
         Adv. Bapu V. Holambe, APP for the Respondent – State.
         API- Mr. Rohan Deshmukh (IO), PSI - Mr. Nitin Kamble (Pairavi Officer),
         Amboli Police Station, Mumbai are present in Court.

                          CORAM: PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
                          DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2026.

         P.C. :-

         1.         Heard learned counsel for applicant as well as learned APP for

         the Respondent - State

         2.         The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with Crime

         No. 1218 of 2025, dated 18.12.2025, registered with Amboli Police Station,
                                            1/5
                                                             908-ABA-1801-2026


Brihanmumbai (City), for the offence punishable under Sections 340(2),

336(3), 338, 336(2), 316(2) and 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS),

2023.

3.          The allegations in the FIR are that the applicant had allegedly

committed substantial financial fraud, forgery, and breach of trust against

the partnership firm M/s Ajmani Consultancy Services. Having initially

secured a Rs. 2,00,000/- vehicle loan from the firm in August, 2016 to

operate a Hyundai Santro Taxi (MH-02-BQ-7521), the accused later

defaulted on his monthly installments after November, 2019 leaving an

outstanding balance of Rs. 2,18,200/-.

4           It is alleged that in October, 2024 the applicant deceptively

obtained the vehicle's original R.C. Book under the mask of photocopying it

for repairs and never returned it. Applicant then forged the firm’s official

letterhead, rubber stamps, and signatures, falsely representing the

partnership as a proprietorship under a fake name ‘Asif Nameed’. Using

these fabricated documents, a fraudulent Form-35 application was filed at

the Andheri RTO and the applicant bypassed the requirement for a legitimate

No Objection Certificate and illegally transferred the vehicle's ownership

out of the victim's company name, and re-registered it under a different

financier naming M/s Sai Enterprises, HP Finance.

5.          Learned counsel for applicant points out that the record

explicitly demonstrates that the applicant had already completed the full and

                                    2/5
                                                                  908-ABA-1801-2026


final repayment of the loan amount availed from the finance company. It is

submitted that despite the complete liquidation of the liability, the finance

company arbitrarily began demanding additional and unsubstantiated sums

of money from the applicant, resorting to severe threats, intimidation, and

unlawful pressure. In response to this continuous harassment and illegal

extortion, the applicant proactively approached the authorities and issued

multiple formal written communications to both the Regional Transport

Office and the Police Department, detailing the illegal acts and threats

perpetrated by the finance company. Learned counsel for the applicant also

states that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is ready to extend

his cooperation to the Investigating Agency as and when required. He also

submits that the applicant has attended the police station in accordance with

the interim protection order dated 10.07.2026 and therefore the interim

protection be confirmed.

6.           The learned APP has vehemently opposed the application,

contending that the complainant operates a firm under the name and style of M/s

Ajmani Consultancy Services, from which the applicant had availed a loan facility.

It is alleged that the applicant, without liquidating the outstanding balance of Rs.

2,18,200/-, fraudulently fabricated a bogus letterhead, rubber stamp, and forged the

signatures of the informant. The applicant allegedly affixed this counterfeit rubber

stamp onto Form No. 35 and dishonestly submitted these fabricated documents to

various government authorities, including the Regional Transport Office thereby


                                        3/5
                                                                   908-ABA-1801-2026


leading to the unauthorized deletion of the informant's company from the financier

details in the Registration Certificate Book. Learned APP submits that the

application deserves rejection on the grounds that the offence is serious and

involve a complex case of cheating and forgery. It is further submitted that the

applicant's custodial interrogation and physical arrest are absolutely essential to

unearth the wider conspiracy.

7.           Learned counsel for the complainant / intervenor also opposed

the application and submitted that the applicant has committed forgery of

documents and by using forged signatures has misrepresented about the

status of the complainant’s concern as a partnership firm and proprietary

concern. He submitted that the applicant has submitted the forged

documents to the office of RTO and thus committed the offences alleged.

8.           Perused the FIR and documents placed on record. It has to be noted

that the FIR is registered after a period of about 11 months from 27 th January,

2025, which is the date of communication with RTO. The applicant’s contention

that after repayment of loan, the finance company has demanded additional

amount and on that count has given threats to the applicant, is a part of

investigation. It is clear that the case against the applicant relies entirely on

documentary evidence. The material documents in question have already been

submitted to the Investigating Officer and are under his custody. As the entire

dispute centers on documentary evidence, the custodial interrogation of the

applicant is not required, to advance the investigation. Consequently, the presence

of the applicant can be secured, by directing him to join the investigation. There is
                                        4/5
                                                               908-ABA-1801-2026


nothing to show that the applicant has misused the interim protection order and

therefore, the interim protection granted to the applicant earlier needs to be

confirmed.

9.           Hence, in view of the above, it is directed that the interim

protection granted by this Court by order dated 10.07.2026 stands confirmed

with modification of condition of attendance of police station with a

direction that applicant shall attend the police station as and when called

upon. Accordingly, the instant application for anticipatory bail is allowed.



                                    (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)




                                     5/5