Bombay High Court
GANESH CHANDRAKANT BHOSALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- NITIN B SURYAWANSHI
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted because the dispute is essentially civil, custodial interrogation is unnecessary, and the applicant can be released on personal bond pending charge‑sheet filing.
Summary
The applicant, Ganesh Chandrakant Bhosale, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a fraud case (Crime No.804 of 2025) involving alleged cheating of Rs.5,55,000 under Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC. The prosecution alleged that Bhosale, along with co‑accused, conspired to obtain a loan of Rs.9,90,000 and misappropriated funds, prompting the informant to file an FIR. The court observed that the dispute primarily concerned repayment of a loan and appeared civil in nature, with the applicant having already paid part of the amount. Since custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary and the investigation was nearing completion, the court granted anticipatory bail on personal bond. The applicant was directed to cooperate with the investigating officer, refrain from tampering with evidence, and the related interim application was also disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case alleged under Sections 420 and 34 IPC.
- Whether the matter is of a civil nature, rendering custodial interrogation unnecessary.
- Whether the applicant can be released on personal bond pending filing of charge‑sheet.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC 420
- IPC 34
- civil dispute
- custodial interrogation
- personal bond
- criminal procedure
Judgment
1
268-ABA-2431-2025.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2431 OF 2025
Ganesh Chandrakant Bhosale ….Applicant
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO.18330 OF 2025
IN
CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2431 OF 2025
Snehal Prince Kumbhar ….Applicant
VERSUS
Ganesh Chandrakant Bhosale ....Respondent
Digitally
signed by
SHANTANU
-----
SHANTANU SHANKARSA
SHANKARSA DHUDUM
DHUDUM Date:
Mr. Sameer S. Kadam, for Applicant.
2026.02.06
21:20:20
+0530
Mr. Anand Subhash Shalgaonkar, APP, for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Akash V. Kumbhar, for Intervenor.
-----
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.
DATE : 6th FEBRUARY, 2026.
P.C.
1. The Applicant apprehends arrest in Crime No.804 of 2025
registered with Satara City Police Station, District: Satara, for the
offences punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”).
2. Prosecution case in short is that Snehal Prince Kumbhar, the
informant was running the CSC Center. In February 2022, she came
Shantanu S. Dhudum
2
268-ABA-2431-2025.DOC
to be acquainted with the accused Ganesh Bhosale. He used to visit
her CSC Center. He was working on ICON application, the said
application was used for transferring of money, payment of bills, etc.
As per the needs of the customers, he would send the amount to her
account for payment of bills. He would collect hard cash at the end of
the day. Due to that, she started to trust him. He suggested to extend
her center and assured to make arrangement of the capital by way of
loan from Union Bank of India. She told him that amount of Rs.5 lakh
is sufficient. At that time, Ganesh told her that she should take the
requisite amount and remaining amount would be used by him and
he will return the amount along with interest. He obtained
documents, i.e., quotations, payment receipts, etc., from Sameer
Shende employee of Total IT Solution. Subsequently, the informant
gave documents to Ganesh. In July, 2022, about 11 a.m., she signed
the bank papers. She came to know that the amount of Rs.9,90,000/-
transferred in the bank account of Total IT Solution. Ganesh, Sameer
and bank manager - Veer Prakash made conspiracy and transferred
loan amount in the bank account of Sameer. On enquiry made by her,
Ganesh transferred amount of Rs.4,35,000/- in the bank account of
the informant. After inquiring about the remaining amount, Ganesh
assured to repay the amount along with interest. The informant
repaid the amount of Rs.4,35,000/-. When informant enquired with
Shantanu S. Dhudum
3
268-ABA-2431-2025.DOC
Ganesh, he sought adjournments. Subsequently, he avoided her. He
executed deed on stamp paper and assured to repay the amount. He
also gave cheques to informant. He deliberately endorsed wrong
signatures on said cheques. He cheated informant for the amount of
Rs.5,55,000/-. Hence, she filed the F.I.R.
3. Heard learned advocate for the Applicant, learned APP for
the Respondent – State and learned advocate for the Intervenor.
Perused the records.
4. Prima facie, it appears that the dispute is of civil nature. It is
the case of the Applicant that earlier he has paid an amount of
Rs.1,00,000/- in cash to the informant. On 4 th February, 2026, he has
paid an amount of Rs.3,54,000/- by NEFT. Learned advocate for the
informant confirms receipt of the said amount. He submits that the
total loan amount was Rs.5,00,000/- out of which Rs.1,00,000/- is
yet to be recovered from the Applicant.
5. Learned advocate for the Applicant submits that the said
amount is liable to be recovered from the co-accused i.e. Sameer
Shende.
6. Learned APP, on instructions, from the Officer of the
concerned police station, who is present in the Court submits that
investigation is complete and charge-sheet is likely to be filed within
three weeks from today.
Shantanu S. Dhudum
4
268-ABA-2431-2025.DOC
7. In the light of the above, custodial interrogation of the
Applicant is not necessary, hence, the application is allowed.
8. In the event of arrest, the Applicant - Ganesh Chandrakant
Bhosale, in connection with Crime No.804 of 2025 registered with
Satara City Police Station, District: Satara, he be released on
executing Personal Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like
amount.
9. Till filing of charge-sheet, the Applicant shall attend the
concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating
Officer.
10. The Applicant shall not tamper the prosecution evidence.
11. In view of disposal of anticipatory bail application, the
interim application also stand disposed off.
(NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)
Shantanu S. Dhudum
Checking your session…