Bombay High Court
FARNAAZ NASIR PIPULKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant with specified conditions.
Summary
Mrs. Farnaaz Nasir Pipulkar applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with FIR No. 102/2023 registered for alleged cheating under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR alleges that she, along with co‑accused, induced a complainant to part with large sums of money in a fraudulent loan scheme. The applicant contended that a protection order dated 6 July 2023 was in force, she had cooperated with the investigation, and she had no prior criminal antecedents. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted that the other accused had been arrested and released on regular bail and that the applicant had complied with procedural requirements. Considering the facts and the applicant’s cooperation, the court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, directing her to furnish a bail bond and comply with reporting requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 438 CrPC despite the allegations of cheating under IPC Sections 420 and 34.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- cheating
- IPC 420
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- protection order
Judgment
15-WP-1822-2023 (CR).doc
Rohit Ghuge
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1822 OF 2023
Mrs. Farnaaz Nasir Pipulkar …Applicant
Versus
Digitally
signed by
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
ROHIT
ROHIT RAMDAS
RAMDAS GHUGE
GHUGE Date:
_______________________________________________________________
2026.08.25
11:20:40
+0530 Mr. Mosin Shaikh, for Applicant.
Mr. S. S. Ghag, APP for Respondent-State.
_______________________________________________________________
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED: 17 AUGUST 2026
P.C.:
1. This matter was called out in the morning session. As none has
appeared for the Applicant as also for Respondent No.2, in the Morning
Session, the matter was kept back in the Afternoon Session.
2. In the Afternoon Session, Mr. Mosin Shaikh, learned Counsel
appearing for the Applicant appeared. None appeared for the
Respondent No.2.
3. As the Anticipatory Bail Application of the year 2023 and pending
in this Court for three years, the same is taken up for hearing and
disposal.
4. In this Anticipatory Bail Application filed under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant is seeking pre-arrest Bail
in connection with Crime No. 102 of 2022 registered with Rabale Police
1
15-WP-1822-2023 (CR).doc
Station, Navi Mumbai under Section 420 read with Section 34 of Indian
Penal Code.
5. Prosecution case is set out in the Anticipatory Bail Application,
which reads as under:
“a. It has been alleged that, Report filed by the complainant
on 03/03/2023 against the present applicant and other
persons and according to her contentions, in December
2016, she came in contact with the present applicant.
Accordingly, they have discussion regarding loan. Moreover,
the applicant has stated her that she is working in ICICI
Bank in loan department and members of financers are well
known to her. At that time, the present applicant introduced
Dhanraj to the complainant and for the loan purpose asked
to bring the documents and sum of Rs. 48,000/- at Vikhroli,
Mumbai. At that time, the present applicant and Dhanraj
told one Sayyed at Kurla, who is their family friend, will
arrange private finance within 7 days. Hence, the informant
and the present accused went to Sayyed Bhai, Sayyed Bhai
gave reference of Dinesh Bhai. Hence, all of them went to
meet Dinesh Bhai and it was agreed that he will give loan at
the rate of 18%, but Rupali refused to take the loan.
b. On the next day, the present applicant called the
complainant at Airoli, where Dhanraj Shetty, one person
Parag and another one person was present. They introduced
Vinay Nair who will arrange private loan on interest and
loan will be provided from ICICI bank, London on verifying
the documents and she was given assurance regarding the
same. Thereafter after some days, her brother-in-law
Mithun Mahale told her that Manoj Gupta of Kota, who is
builder is in need of 10 Crores of Rupees and Manoj Gupta
will keep 9.50 lacs with him and pay Rs. 50 lacs.
Accordingly, documents of Manoj Gupta's property in
Rajasthan, Kota was kept to be mortgaged. Thereafter, they
contacted the present accused she demanded 9% of the loan
amount from Manoj Gupta. At that time, Manoj Gupta told
that he will not pay any amount or any advance till the loan
is passed. On 29/12/2016, meeting was arranged at Oberoi
Mall and in that meeting, the present applicant told Manoj
Gupta that on the valuation of the property and all the
2
15-WP-1822-2023 (CR).doc
documents are verified, then loan will be passed within 10
to 15 days. On 02/01/2017, the loan process started. The
present applicant asked to bring the stamp papers of 500
rupees and obtained cheques. But one cheque of amount of
Rs. 6,800/- was mentioned and the receipt of the cheque
was blank. In January, 2018 the present applicant told that
in the account of Gayatri Constructions of Manoj Gupta,
process of payment is started. But, as no amount was
credited on the account of Manoj Gupta she contacted ICICI
bank on Toll Free number, where she came to know that on
payment of processing fee loan will be passed and amount
will be credited. It was told by the present applicant.
Thereafter, the present applicant pressurized the
complainant to pay sum of Rs. 30 Lacs otherwise, loan will
be cancelled. The complainant has denied that she is having
nothing and she could not arrange the said amount.
Accordingly, the present applicant stated that whatever
amount she has to be given to her. Accordingly, the present
accused introduced Shamim Pipulkar. The present accused
to whom sum of Rs. 2 lacs paid but she do not remember
the date. Thereafter, the present accused told to adjust Rs.
28 lacs. Accordingly, she was having the transaction with
Shamim Pipulkar previously. Hence, the complainant
believed the lady and on keeping faith on Vinay Nair, on
29/01/2018 paid 11 lacs by Abhyudaya Bank. On
31/01/2018 Rs. 10 lacs from Abhyudaya Bank. On
02/02/2018, she paid Rs 9 lacs through cash deposit
machine. She paid sum of Rs. 2 lacs to the present
applicant, Rs. 30 lacs to Vinay Nair in his account, who is in
jail. Thus, according to the informant/complainant, the
present applicant/accused has cheated her for the same.
c. The informant has lodged the report on 03.03.2023
in the Rabale Police Station, registered FIR C.R No.
102/2023 Under Section 420 and 34 of IPC. On the basis of
that report, aforesaid offences were registered against the
present applicant and the co-accused.”
6. It is submission of Mr. Mosin Shaikh, learned Counsel appearing
for the Applicant that the Applicant has been protected in this case by
order darted 06th July 2023 and till date i.e. for more than a period of 3
3
15-WP-1822-2023 (CR).doc
years the said protection continues. He submitted that, the charge-sheet
is already filed against other accused and the applicant has attended the
police station as and when called. He submits that, although statement
has been made on behalf of the Applicant which has been recorded in
the order dated 10th April 2026 to the effect that the Applicant is ready
to settle the matter by depositing an amount of Rs. 6,62,545/- in the
bank account of the Respondent No.2 towards the disputed transaction,
however, it is submitted that, the said statement has been made as on
the last occasion, bank account statement has been furnished to that
effect. However, he submits that the Applicant has again checked her
bank statement and no such amount has been deposited in the account
of the Applicant. He submits that, Applicant is a lady and there are no
other antecedents.
7. On the other hand learned APP strongly opposes the application.
8. As noted hereinabove inspite of opportunity given none appears
for the Respondent No.2.
9. Perusal of the record shows that, the FIR has been lodged on 03 rd
March 2023 against four accused. The Applicant No. 1 is the Accused
No.1. As far as, Accused Nos. 2 to 4 are concerned, they have been
arrested and released on regular bail.
10. A learned Single Judge by order dated 06 th July 2023 has granted
protection to the Applicant, which continues till date. It is admitted
4
15-WP-1822-2023 (CR).doc
position that the Applicant has co-operated with the investigation and
has attended the Police Station as and when called. The Applicant is a
lady.
11. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances, case is made out for
grant of Anticipatory Bail.
12. In view thereof, the following order is passed.
ORDER
(a) In the event of arrest of Applicant – Mrs. Farnaaz Nasir
Pipulkar in connection with Crime No. 102 of 2022 registered
with Rabale Police Station, Navi Mumbai, the Applicant is
directed to be released on bail on her furnishing P.R. Bond in
the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in
the like amount.
(b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as
and when called.
(c) The Applicant shall furnish her cell phone number and
residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep
the same updated, in case of any change thereto.
(d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted
with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person
5
15-WP-1822-2023 (CR).doc
from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police
personnel.
(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence
and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any
witness in any manner.
13. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
6
Checking your session…