Bombay High Court

DURGESH PRAKASH SONAWANE AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 8 January 2026
Disposal: Allowed
Bench: MADHAV JAMDAR

Holding

The court upheld the interim anticipatory bail order, finding the forgery allegation unsustainable and the dispute essentially civil, and disposed of the application accordingly.

Summary

The State of Maharashtra filed an FIR alleging that the applicants forged a No‑Objection Certificate (NOC) and cheated a buyer by selling the same flat twice. The applicants contended that the NOC was genuine, citing the society secretary’s letter, and argued that the dispute was essentially civil, supported by a pending specific‑performance suit. The learned Single Judge granted interim anticipatory bail, noting that the forgery allegation appeared unsustainable and that investigation papers were not yet produced. The State opposed the bail, asserting the seriousness of the offence and the near‑completion of the investigation. The High Court upheld the interim bail order, imposing conditions and directing the applicants to cooperate with the investigation, and disposed of the anticipatory bail application in accordance with the earlier order.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the alleged forgery and cheating charges.
Whether the alleged forgery of the NOC constitutes a cognizable offence warranting denial of bail.
Whether the civil nature of the dispute precludes criminal prosecution.
What conditions, if any, should be imposed on the grant of anticipatory bail.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
forgery
civil dispute
No‑Objection Certificate
double sale of property
bail conditions
Criminal Procedure Code
Section 438

Judgment

907-ABA-2730-2024.doc

Arjun

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2730 OF 2024
Digitally
signed by
ARJUN 1. Durgesh Prakash Sonawane …Applicants
ARJUN VITTHAL
VITTHAL KUDHEKAR
KUDHEKAR Date: 2. Prakash Maruti Sonawane
2026.01.08
20:35:15
+0530
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
_______________________________________________________________
None for the Applicants.
Mr. S. M. Mangaonkar, APP, for the Respondent-State.
P.S.I. Nandkumar Manohar Kekan, Yerwada Police Station, Pune City,
present.
_______________________________________________________________

CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED: 08 JANUARY 2026

P.C.:

1. Although none appears for the Applicants, with the assistance of

Mr. Mangaonkar, learned APP perused the papers.

2. Mr. Mangaonkar, learned APP, points out the FIR on Page No.14

as also the Plaint filed by the First Informant on Page No.45. However,

he states that the offence is very serious as there is forgery.

3. However, a learned Single Judge by Order dated 8th October

2024 has granted interim protection to the Applicant. The said Order

reads as under :-

“1. Heard, Mr. Shejwal, learned counsel for the applicants
and Ms. Ambekar, learned APP for respondent – State, as also
Mr. Deokar, learned counsel having instructions to appear on
behalf of respondent No.2 (First Informant).

1
907-ABA-2730-2024.doc

2. The FIR in the present case is registered on the
grievance of the respondent No.2 that the applicants accepted
certain amount from him in the context of a registered deed
of assignment dated 28.04.2022, whereby the applicants had
agreed to sell a flat to respondent No.2. It is stated that the
respondent No.2 claimed that further amount of ₹ 50,000/-
was taken from him, as the applicants informed that the
amount would have to be transferred to the society in which
the flat was located for obtaining No Objection Certificate
(NOC). It is further alleged that the NOC was a forged
document and therefore, the informant was cheated. It was
further claimed that in the meanwhile, the applicants also
sold the very same flat to another party, thereby cheating the
respondent No.2.

3. The learned counsel for the applicants has invited
attention of this Court to the contents of the aforesaid deed of
assignment, as also a specific letter dated 26.08.2023, issued
by the very same secretary of the society, who has stated that
he had indeed issued the NOC dated 26.04.2022. Prima facie,
the aforesaid document indicates that the allegation regarding
forgery of the NOC appears to be unsustainable. The other
allegation pertains to the very same flat being sold to another
party. In that context, the learned counsel for the applicants
has relied upon a legal notice dated 11.10.2022 issued to the
respondent No.2, whereby the applicants had called upon the
respondent No.2 to cancel the registered deed of assignment.
Attention of this Court is also invited to a Civil Suit bearing
Special Civil Suit No.1602 of 2023, already filed by the
respondent No.2 alongwith his wife against the applicants
before the Competent Civil Court at Pune, seeking specific
performance of the registered deed of assignment.

4. Although the learned APP and the learned counsel
having instructions to appear on behalf of respondent No.2
have vehemently opposed the prayers made in the present
application, this Court is of the opinion that till such time that
the investigation papers are produced before this Court and
the respondent No.2 files reply affidavit alongwith
documents, the applicants have made out a case for granting
interim relief.

5. Prima facie, the allegation pertaining to forgery does
not appear to be sustainable in respect of the NOC issued by

2
907-ABA-2730-2024.doc

the secretary of the society and in the light of the pending
civil suit, it can be said that the dispute between the parties is
essentially of a civil nature.

6. In view of the above, there shall be interim order in
the following terms :

(A) Till the next date of listing, in the event the applicants
are arrested in connection with FIR No.0612 of 2023,
dated 05.09.2023, registered at Police Station
Yerwada, District Pune, they shall be released on bail,
on furnishing PR Bonds of ₹ 50,000/- each one or two
sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the
Trial Court.

(B) The applicants shall remain present before the
Investigating Officer on 10th October, 2024 between
10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon and thereafter as and
when called by the Investigating Officer.

(C) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation
and produce such documents as are in their
possession, which may be demanded by the
Investigating Officer.

(D) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence in
any manner. He shall not influence the informant,
witnesses or any other persons concerned with the
case.

7. Needless to say, violation of any of the aforesaid
conditions may result in this order being cancelled.

8. List the application for further consideration on 18th
November, 2024, “High on Board”.”

4. Mr. Mangaonkar, learned APP, submits that the investigation is

almost completed and that the Charge-sheet will be filed shortly.

3
907-ABA-2730-2024.doc

5. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of in

terms of the Order dated 8th October 2024.

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…