Bombay High Court
SANGEETA KAUSTUBH WAGLE(WIFE OF MR KAUSTABH GANPAT WAGLE)versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, directing release on bond subject to cooperation with the investigation.
Summary
The applicant, Sangeeta Kaustubh Wagle, was implicated in a 2026 FIR alleging forgery of documents submitted in 2000 for the registration of a housing society, invoking IPC sections 420, 463, 464, 465, 468 and 471. She contended that there was no evidence of her personally forging signatures or obtaining wrongful gain, and highlighted her senior‑citizen status and willingness to cooperate with investigators, having already attended the police station on several occasions. The State opposed bail, asserting that the applicant, as promoter, was the main person who submitted the forged documents. The Court observed that the alleged forgery pertained to events two decades earlier, that the matter was still under investigation, and that there was no immediate risk of flight or tampering, especially given the applicant’s cooperation. Consequently, the Court confirmed the interim protection and granted anticipatory bail on a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with a surety, directing the applicant to appear before the investigating agency as required.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged forgery and fraud under IPC sections 420, 463, 464, 465, 468 and 471.
- Whether the applicant’s senior‑citizen status and cooperation with the investigation justify bail.
- Whether the interim protection previously granted should be confirmed.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 420, 463, 464, 465, 468, 471
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- forgery
- IPC sections 420 463 464 465 468 471
- senior citizen
- cooperation with investigation
- bail bond
Judgment
1-ABA-2039-2026.odt
Harish
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2039 OF 2026
Sangeeta Kaustubh Wagle
(Wife Of Mr Kaustabh Ganpat Wagle) ...Applicant
V/S.
State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
_____________________________________________________________
Senior Adv. Rajendra Shirodkar, Archit Sakhalkar i/b Aditya Parab, for the
Applicant.
Adv. Prasanna P. Malashe, APP for the Respondent – State.
Adv. Marmik Shak a/w Mayuresh Deshmukh, for the Respondent No.2/
Complainant.
API – Mr. Vijay Khilare, Meghwadi, Police Station Mumbai is present.
________________________________________________________
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 02ND SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned APP for
the respondent-state and Adv. Marmik Shah, for the respondent no.2.
2. Apprehending arrest in Crime No. 246 of 2026 dated 19.05.2026
registered with Meghwadi Police Station, for the offence punishable under
Sections 420, 463, 464, 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC),
1860, the applicant has filed the instant application seeking pre-arrest bail.
1/4
1-ABA-2039-2026.odt
3. The offence is registered on the basis of a report lodged by the
complainant alleging that in the year 2000, certain documents with forged
signatures were submitted by this applicant for the purpose of getting the
society registered, at a time when this applicant was working as a Promoter
of the Housing Society. It is alleged that on the basis of the forged
documents, the society was registered and even thereafter certain property
cards were prepared on the basis of those forged documents and the forgery
was revealed to the complainant in the year 2026. On the basis of these
allegations, the FIR is registered against this applicant.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the allegations
about forgery are with respect to certain documents which were submitted
by the society in the year 2000. He submits that although the allegations
about forgery are levelled, but there is nothing to show that this applicant
has actually done any kind of forgery by forging signatures of any of the
members as alleged. It is submitted that there is nothing to show any
wrongful gain to this applicant on the basis of the allegedly forged
documents. He also submits that the applicant is senior citizen lady aged
about 64 years and has already expressed her readiness to extend
cooperation to the investigating agency and therefore, her custodial
interrogation need not be insisted.
5. Learned counsel for applicant also submits that in accordance with
the interim protection granted by this Court, this applicant has attended the
police station on 03.08.2026, 07.08.2026 and 08.08.2026 and again on
01.09.2026, when the specimen handwriting of this applicant is obtained by
2/4
1-ABA-2039-2026.odt
the investigating agency. He, therefore, prays for confirmation of the interim
protection.
6. As against this, learned APP as well as learned counsel for the
respondent no.2 has advanced submissions and has opposed the application.
It is submitted that the applicant was working as a Promoter and is the main
person who had submitted all the documents for the purpose of registration
of the society and signature of a person by name Amarpal Singh Sahani and
signature of three more people were forged when the documents were
submitted. The counsel for respondent no. 2 submits that the complainant
got knowledge about forgery only in the year 2026 and thereafter the offence
is registered. As regards the contentions of the applicant about attendance of
the police station, there is no dispute that the applicant has attended the
police station on the dates mentioned above. Learned APP also does not
dispute that the specimen handwriting of the applicant was obtained on 01 st
September, 2026.
7. After perusal of the FIR and the allegations levelled against the
applicant, it appears that the allegations pertain to the year 2000 when
certain documents were submitted by the society for the purpose of getting
its registration. The contentions about forgery, if any, would be a subject
matter of investigation. It has to be noted that, considering the nature of
allegations, the investigation has to be primarily with respect to the
documentary evidence and there is no question of any recovery from this
applicant. At this stage, considering the fact that the applicant is extending
cooperation, the interim protection granted earlier needs to be confirmed.
3/4
1-ABA-2039-2026.odt
8. Hence, I pass the following order :
: ORDER :
i] The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
ii] In the event of arrest of this applicant in Crime
No. 246 of 2026 dated 19.05.2026 registered with
Meghwadi Police Station, for the offence
punishable under Sections 420, 463, 464, 465, 468
and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, she
be released on P. R. bond of Rs. 25,000 (Twenty
Five Thousand Only), with one solvent surety of
like amount.
iii] The applicant is directed to attend the
investigating agency as and when called upon by
the investigating agency.
iv] The applicant is directed to extend co-operation
during investigation and trial.
9. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed in
above terms.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
4/4
Checking your session…