Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

VIJAYKUMAR ANKUSH KAWADE AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The anticipatory bail application is disposed of in terms of the earlier order granting interim protection, so the bail continues.

Summary

The applicants filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the CrPC for offences under Sections 420 and 406 of the IPC arising from a fraud case (CR No.626/2024). The prosecution argued the offence was serious, but noted that a charge‑sheet had already been filed and the investigation was complete. A learned Single Judge had earlier granted interim bail protection to the applicants on 12 November 2024, which remained in force. The High Court considered the anticipatory bail request in light of the existing interim bail order. It disposed of the anticipatory bail application by referring to the earlier order, thereby allowing the bail protection to continue.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the charge‑sheet is already filed and investigation is complete.
  • Whether the interim bail order dated 12 November 2024 remains effective for the applicants.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • IPC 420
  • IPC 406
  • charge sheet
  • interim bail
  • High Court

Judgment

                                                                               912-ABA-2941-2024.doc


                                                                                       Arjun

                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2941 OF 2024
         Digitally
         signed by
         ARJUN        1. Vijaykumar Ankush Kawade                              …Applicants
ARJUN    VITTHAL
VITTHAL  KUDHEKAR
KUDHEKAR Date:        2. Dhananjay Shantaram Wayakar
         2026.01.08
         20:35:16
         +0530
                             Versus
                      The State of Maharashtra                                 …Respondent
                      _______________________________________________________________

                      None for the Applicant.
                      Ms. G. P. Mulekar, APP, for the Respondent-State.
                      P.S.I. S. R. Dambale, Lonikand Police Station, Pune City, present.
                      _______________________________________________________________

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

                      P.C.:

                      1.      None appears for the Applicant.

                      2.      Ms. Mulekar, learned APP, submits that the offence is very serious

                      and therefore the Anticipatory Bail Application be rejected. However,

                      she submits that the Charge-sheet is already filed and that the Applicant

                      has complied with the Order dated 12th November 2024 passed by a

                      learned Single Judge.

                      3.      The Applicant, by the present Anticipatory Bail Application filed

                      under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is seeking

                      pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.626 of 2024 registered with

                      the Lonikand Police Station, Pune City, for the offences punishable




                                                           1
                                                         912-ABA-2941-2024.doc


under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

4.    The prosecution case is set out in Paragraph No.3 of the Order

dated 1st October 2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Pune in Criminal Bail Application No.5020 of 2024, which reads

as under :-

     “3]     It is the story of the prosecution that the accused No.1
     Sachin Ankush Gore was residing in front of the house of
     informant Jatin Mustafa Sayyad. Accused No.1 made contacts
     with the informant and with the help of informant showed the
     vehicles of Kisan Chinchale that those are for sale. Thus, he
     developed trust and thereafter, sold the said vehicles vide
     agreements executed at Notary Register office, at
     Chandannagar, Pune. It is alleged in the complaint that the
     accused No.1 and the present applicants accused No.2 and 3
     cheated and defrauded the informant on the pretext of selling
     their car for Rs.10,37,910/-. Accordingly offence came to be
     registered vide Crime No. 626/2024 at Lonikand Police
     Station.”

5.    A learned Single Judge has granted interim protection to the

Applicant by the Order dated 12th November 2024 which continues till

date. The Charge-sheet has already been filed. Thus, investigation is

completed.

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

terms of the Order dated 12th November 2024 passed by a learned

Single Judge.


                                            [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]




                                    2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.