Bombay High Court
SHOBHA TANAJI KHULEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court confirmed the anticipatory bail order with added conditions and disposed of the application.
Summary
Shobha Tanaji Khule applied for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 526 of 2025 alleging falsification of relatives' death and fictitious property ownership. The trial court granted bail on a bond of Rs.50,000 with a direction to appear before the investigating officer as required. The State opposed, seeking stricter conditions, while an intervenor filed an intervention application which was allowed. The High Court confirmed the bail order, imposing additional conditions that the applicant must cooperate with the investigation, refrain from influencing witnesses, not tamper with evidence, and keep the police informed of her address and contact details. The anticipatory bail application was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted subject to the condition of appearing before the investigating officer
- Whether the court can impose restrictions on the applicant from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence
- Whether the intervenor's application for intervention should be entertained
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
- investigation cooperation
- witness intimidation
- intervention
Judgment
52B-i-ABA-2238-2025 (CR).docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 2238 OF 2025
Shobha Tanaji Khule … Applicant
Versus.
The State Of Maharashtra And Another … Respondents
-----
Mr. Shardul Diwan i/b. Mr. Rahul Kadam for the Applicant.
Mr. A.S. Shalgaonkar, A.P.P. for the Respondents-State.
Mr. Shubham Visekar i/b. Mr. Ganesh Shiraskar for the Intervenor.
-------
Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
Date : 24th August 2026.
PER COURT :
1. Heard Mr. Shardul Diwan, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mr.
Shalgaonkar, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents-State and Mr. Shubham
Visekar, learned Advocate for the Intervenor.
2. On 19th September 2025, the following order was passed :
“1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the
Respondent – State.
2. It is the contention of learned APP that the Applicant has shown
their relatives as dead when they were alive at the time of alleged
osk 1 of 4
52B-i-ABA-2238-2025 (CR).docx
incident, and she seeks time to take instructions as to whether those
individuals have filed any complaint or not.
3. The allegations against the Applicant are that they have shown
the property in a fictitious name. However, it appears from the record
that the Applicant has purchased the said property.
4. Considering the allegations in the F.I.R., I pass the following
order:
ORDER
i. Till the next date, in the event of arrest, the
Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with
the C.R. No.526 of 2025 registered with Karmala
Police Station, on executing P.R. Bond in the sum
of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like
amount.
ii. The Applicant shall attend the concerned police
station as and when required.
5. Learned counsel for the Intervenor seeks leave to file
intervention application. Leave granted.
6. Stand over to 7th October, 2025.
3. Mr. Shardul Diwan, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that the
Applicant has appeared before the Investigating Officer at Karmala Police
Station, District Solapur Rural and has cooperated with the investigation of
Crime No. 526 of 2025. He further states that the Applicant shall continue to
cooperate with the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer
osk 2 of 4
52B-i-ABA-2238-2025 (CR).docx
at Karmala Police Station, District Solapur Rural, as and when required.
4. Mr. A.S. Shalgaonkar, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents-State, on
instructions from the Investigating Officer, states that the Applicant has
appeared before the Investigating Officer and has cooperated in the
investigation of Crime No. 526 of 2025. He submits that the investigation is
ongoing and that the Investigating Officer will require the Applicant's
presence for further investigation. He therefore requests that a condition be
imposed upon the Applicant to appear before the Investigating Officer as and
when directed. He further submits, on instructions from the Investigating
Officer, that custodial interrogation of the Applicant in Crime No. 526 of
2025 is not required.
5. Mr. Shubham Visekar, learned Advocate for the Intervenor, opposes the
Application and prays for its rejection.
6. Mr. Shardul Diwan, learned Advocate for the Applicant, on
instructions, states that the Applicant shall appear before the Investigating
Officer at Karmala Police Station in Crime No. 526 of 2025, as and when
required by the Investigating Officer. The said statement is accepted.
7. In view of the above, the order dated 19 th September 2025 is confirmed
with the following additional conditions:-
osk 3 of 4
52B-i-ABA-2238-2025 (CR).docx
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS :
“(a) The Applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer,
Karmala Police Station, District Solapur Rural, as and when
required by the Investigating Officer in Crime No. 526 of 2025.
(b) The Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case to dissuade that person from disclosing the
facts to the Court or any police officer.
(c) The Applicant shall not tamper with evidence in any manner.
(d) The Applicant shall provide the Investigation Officer with her
residential address along with proof, her contact numbers and
must inform the Investigating Officer of any changes to this
information from time to time. ”
8. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2238 of 2025 is disposed of.
[ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ]
Digitally signed
by OMKAR
SHIVAHAR
OMKAR KUMBHAKARN
SHIVAHAR
KUMBHAKARN Date:
2026.08.25
13:26:08
+0530
osk 4 of 4
Checking your session…