ARUN SHANKAR PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                                                     901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                          CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2341 OF 2023

                       Arun Shankar Patil and Anr.                                   ...Applicants
                               Versus
                       The State of Maharashtra and Anr.                ...Respondents
                       _______________________________________________________________
                       Mr. Sharad Bhosale a/w Pruthviraj Dagade, Advocate for the Applicants.
                       Mr. C. D. Mali, APP for the Respondent – State.
                       Mr. Dhananjay Rananaware a/w Samarth Chavan and Shubham
                       Dhoble, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2.
                       PSI S. D. Bhilari, Karad Taluka Police Station, is present.
          Digitally
          signed by
          ARJUN
                       _______________________________________________________________
ARJUN     KRISHNA
KRISHNA
RODGE
          RODGE
          Date:
                                                   CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
          2026.10.03
          14:01:52
          +0530                                     DATE : 1st October, 2026.
                       P.C. :


                       1.      Heard, Mr. Sharad Bhosale, learned Advocate for the Applicant,

                       Mr. C. D. Mali, learned APP for the Respondent – State and Mr.

                       Dhananjay Rananaware, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 2.



                       2.      By this Application filed under Section 438 of the Code of

                       Criminal Procedure (now Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

                       Suraksha    Sanhita,   2023),   the    Applicant   seeks   pre-arrest       bail,

                       apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 131 of 2023

                       registered with the Karad Taluka Police Station, District Satara, for

                       Arjun                              1
                                                         901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code.



3.      Mr. Sharad Bhosale, learned Advocate for the Applicants, states

that there are two (2) accused in Crime No. 131 of 2023, with Applicant

No. 1 being accused No. 1 and Applicant No. 2 being accused No. 2.



4.      In brief, the prosecution case is that Respondent No.2 owned 8

acres of agricultural land and a residential house at Supane and

Abaichiwadi. Applicant No.1, her brother and Applicant No.2, her

nephew, told her that her deceased daughter's shares in “Sahyadri

Sugar Factory” were to be transferred in the name of Applicant No.2.

Thereafter, Deepak Patil, who resides nearby, arrived in his rickshaw

and informed Respondent No.2 that Applicant No.2 had called

Respondent No.2 to the Government office. Respondent No.2 then went

to the Government office at Karad by rickshaw, where Applicant No.1,

Applicant No.2 and others were present. Respondent No.2 was told that

her thumb impression and photograph were required to transfer the

shares in the name of Applicant No.2, accordingly, she gave

them. During the subsequent rainy season, when the cultivator of

Respondent No.2, namely Kantaram Gaikwad, went to cultivate the

land, Applicant No.1 and Applicant No.2 threatened him and stated that

Arjun                            2
                                                             901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


they had purchased the land. Subsequently, Pravin Kumar Uttamrao

Patil, her other nephew, obtained the relevant land documents and

informed Respondent No.2 that Applicant No.2 had transferred her

agricultural land and residential house in his name.



5.      Mr. Sharad Bhosale, learned Advocate for the Applicants, submits

that the subject matter of Crime No. 131 of 2023 is a pure civil dispute

between the Applicants and Respondent No. 2, in respect of which the

Applicants have filed a civil suit against Respondent No. 2 and

Respondent No. 2 has also filed a suit against the Applicants, both of

which are pending. He submits that the sale transaction in respect of

the immovable property and the residential house, which Respondent

No. 2 now complains of as an act of cheating and a fraud on her rights,

was executed by Respondent No. 2 before the Competent Authority,

that the same are registered documents and that Respondent No. 2 was

paid the amounts she had requested as consideration towards the

sale. He submits that Respondent No. 2 accepted the consideration

amounts mentioned in the Sale Deeds. He further submits that the FIR

filed by Respondent No. 2 is delayed. He states that the Sale Deeds were

executed     on   03.03.2022   and    04.03.2022,      respectively,      while

Respondent No. 2 filed the complaint in March 2023.



Arjun                             3
                                                           901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


6.      Mr. C. D. Mali, learned APP for the Respondent – State, submits

that the Applicants have committed systematic fraud and cheated

Respondent No. 2, a senior citizen. He submits that the FIR narration

itself shows that the Applicants, by dishonest intent and tactics,

defrauded Respondent No. 2 by taking full advantage of her innocence.



7.      Mr.   Dhananjay    Rananaware,     learned   Advocate      for     the

Respondent No. 2, submits that the Applicants have taken advantage of

their relationship with the Respondent No. 2. He further submits that

the innocence of the Respondent No. 2 was exploited by the Applicants,

who betrayed the trust the Respondent No. 2 reposed in her brother

and the nephew. He submits that the Applicants dishonestly and

mischievously obtained the thumb impression of Respondent No. 2 by

misleading her into believing that it was for the transfer of the shares of

Sakhar Karkhana standing in the name of her deceased daughter. He

further submits that the Respondent No. 2 was in no need of money nor

was any money due or payable by her to the Applicants as such, there

was no occasion for the Applicants to sell her properties. He submits

that the Applicants' mischievous intentions, even after executing the

fraudulent sale deed, are evident from the suit filed by the Applicants

against Respondent No. 2, wherein the Applicants seek a declaration

that the sale deeds are valid.
Arjun                             4
                                                                     901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


8.      Mr. Dhananjay Rananaware, learned Advocate for Respondent

No. 2, refers to the order dated 30.07.2025 (coram: Milind Sathaye J.)

passed in this application, which reads as follows:


           1.            Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant, learned
           Counsel for the Respondent/complainant and learned APP for
           State.
           2.              The Applicants are protected under order dated
           21.08.2023.
           3.            I have perused the record and the investigation
           papers shown by the learned APP.
           4.           The Applicants are brother and nephew of the
           complainant.
           5.             As per the allegations in the FIR, the Applicants
           have got registered sale deed in respect of complainant's 8 acres
           of agricultural land a dwelling house in their favour on false
           pretext. The complainant was given to understand that she is
           signing for transfer of shares in the sugar factory which
           belonged to her deceased daughter. The complainant is an old
           lady of advanced age. On the date of FIR, she was 85 years old.
           The documents of sale deeds of March 2022 though registered,
           indicate that the sale deeds are heavily under-valued. An
           agricultural land of which market/ready-reckoner value is
           shown as Rs.60 lakh and odd is shown to have been sold for
           consideration of Rs.22 lakh stated to be paid in past from time-
           to-time for household expenses, medicines and other dues
           without any receipts. Similarly, the house properties with
           gaothan land of which market/ready-reckoner value is shown as
           Rs.11 lakh is shown to have been sold for Rs.3.50,000/- and
           once again this consideration is stated to be paid in past from
           time-to-time for the purpose of household expenses, medicines
           and other dues, once again without any receipts.
           6.              Learned Counsel for the complainant submits
           that going by the age of the complainant and who has lost her
           daughter, it is most unlikely that she would part with both her
           house and agricultural land in favour of her close relative, if she
           was really informed about the nature of the documents.
           7.              Learned Counsel for the Applicants in
           anticipatory bail application submitted that suits are pending
           between the parties in respect of the registered documents and
           the FIR is filed belatedly in March, 2023. However, record
           indicates that the complainant was trying to file complaint ever
           since June, 2022 because at that time, the complainant's
           workers were obstructed by the Applicants and that led to
Arjun                                  5
                                                                  901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


           finding out about the sale deeds.
           8.              In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, before
           the decision is taken about whether to continue the anticipatory
           bail or not, an opportunity deserves to be granted to the
           Applicants to secure the complainant by depositing certain
           amount sufficient to cover the transactions in question, as a
           security.
           9.            For such opportunity, the matter is adjourned for
           further consideration. Learned Counsel for the Applicant
           submits that he will take necessary instructions and inform the
           Court.
           10.      Stand over to 13.08.2025. Interim protection granted
           earlier to continue till next date.



9.      Today, Mr. Sharad Bhosale, learned Advocate for the Applicants,

on instructions from the Applicants, submitted that the Applicants are

not willing to deposit any amount.



10.     Perused the records with the assistance of the learned Advocates

for the parties.



11.     Perusal of the complaint indicates that the Applicants took full

advantage of a gullible senior citizen, aged 85 years and by

misrepresentation, obtained her thumb impression on the Sale Deeds.

The subject matter of Crime No. 131 of 2023 is two Sale Deeds dated

03.03.2022 and 04.03.2022, by which the residential house of the

Applicant and the 8-acre property of Respondent No. 2 were transferred

by the Applicants in the name of Applicant No. 2.



Arjun                                 6
                                                                       901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


12.      Pertinent to note that although the ready reckoner rate in the

Sale Deed dated 03.03.2022 is shown as Rs. 11,04,327/- and in the Sale

Deed dated 04.03.2022, the same is Rs. 60,57,800/-, the consideration

amounts are Rs. 3,50,000/- and Rs. 26,00,000/-, respectively.



13.      The payment of the consideration amount in respect of the Sale

Deeds is shown to have been made by the Applicants to the Respondent

No. 2 in the past, from time to time, for household expenses, medicines

and other dues, without any receipts. The recital in respect of the

payment of consideration in the respective Sale Deeds are reproduced

verbatim:-



      a. Sale Deed dated 03.03.2022 at page 40 of the paper book:-



            मी तुमचेपासून गांवी वेळोवेळी माझे घरखचासाठी, औषधोपचारासाठी व लोकांचे
            देणेवारणेसाठी ि!नले ख घेतले ते रकम ुपये तीन लाख पनास हजार फत ते या
            द्ताचे भर्यात सामील व क!ूल तरार नाही.


      b. Sale Deed dated 04.03.2022 at page 63 of the paper book:-



            मी तुमचेपासून गांवी वेळोवेळी माझे घरखचासाठी, औषधोपचारासाठी व लोकांचे
            देणेवारणेसाठी ि!नले ख घेतले ते रकम ुपये स्वीस लाख फत ते या द्ताचे
            भर्यात सामील व क!ूल तरार नाही.


14.      Apparently, by executing Sale Deeds as narrated by Respondent

No. 2 in her complaint, the Applicants have denied Respondent No. 2


Arjun                                   7
                                                           901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


not only her property but also her residential house, astonishingly

without paying a single penny. To add to the miseries of Respondent No.

2, she is also made to face a civil suit.



15.     The contention of Mr. Sharad Bhosale, learned Advocate for the

Applicants, that Crime No. 131 of 2023 is civil in nature, must be taken

note of for the purpose of rejecting the same. Remedies under criminal

and civil law run side by side, they are not mutually exclusive but are

clearly co-extensive and differ in their context and consequences. It is

settled law that both civil and criminal proceedings can be maintained

on the same set of allegations against the same person and there is no

bar to maintaining civil and criminal cases. If the element of criminality

is present, a civil case and a criminal case can co-exist on the same set

of facts. In the present case, criminality is disclosed as such, the

pendency of the civil action, as claimed by Mr. Sharad Bhosale, learned

Advocate for the Applicant, will not assist the Applicants in any

manner.



16.     Prima facie, the dishonest intentions of the Applicants to deceive

Respondent No. 2 from inception are writ large as revealed from the

records placed in the file of this Application. This is a case in which a

gullible senior citizen, none other than a relative of the Applicants, has

Arjun                               8
                                                           901-ABA-2341-2023.doc


been deceived. Ingredients of the offences charged in Crime No. 131 of

2023 are prima facie made out against the Applicants.



17.     In view of the above, the Applicants deserve no indulgence. This

Application is therefore dismissed.



18.     The observations made in this order are prima facie and are for

deciding the Bail Application.



19.     Anticipatory Bail Application No.2341 of 2023 is disposed of.




                                                (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)




Arjun                             9