Bombay High Court

RAMESH RAMCHANDRA KALYANKER AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided: 10 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted to the applicants, subject to conditions, as the dispute was settled and the FIR was to be challenged.

Summary

The applicants, Ramesh Kalyankar and family, were charged under IPC sections 420 and 34 for allegedly selling a mortgaged property to Sohil Intikhab Alam Hawaldar despite knowing of the mortgage. The parties later reached a settlement and agreed to file a writ petition to quash the FIR, also seeking to implead Hawaldar as a respondent. The court allowed the amendment to include the third respondent and, considering the settlement and the civil nature of the dispute, granted anticipatory bail with strict conditions. The bail order required the applicants to furnish a personal bond, attend police inquiries, disclose contact details, and refrain from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence. The anticipatory bail application was disposed of in the applicants' favour.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the parties have settled the underlying dispute and intend to seek quashing of the FIR.
Whether the third party, Sohil Intikhab Alam Hawaldar, can be impleaded as a respondent in the anticipatory bail application.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 420

Subjects

anticipatory bail
settlement
IPC 420
IPC 34
property fraud
mortgaged property
bail conditions
CrPC 438

Judgment

908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
by PRACHI
PRACHI
PRANESH
PRANESH CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
NANDIWADEKAR
NANDIWADEKAR
Date: 2026.09.11
10:35:09 +0530 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 339 OF 2026
WITH
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 336 OF 2026

Ramesh Ramchandra Kalyankar & Ors. … Applicants
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. …. Respondents
______________________

Mr. Amogh Karandikar, for the Applicants.
Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Manoj P. Inamdar, for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3.
Mr. Sagar Nikam, PI attached to Taloja Police Station, Navi
Mumbai present.
Mr. Ramesh Ramchandra Kalyankar, Applicant No.1, Rasiiek
Kalyankar, Applicant No.2 and Mrs. Rachana Ramesh Kalyankar,
Applicant No.3 are present.
______________________

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 10 SEPTEMBER 2026
P. C. :-

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 339 OF 2026

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants and

the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents.

2. At the outset, the learned counsel appearing for the

Applicants and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2

Page 1
PPN
908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC

state that the dispute which is the subject matter of C.R. No.433 of

2025 registered with Taloja Police Station, Navi Mumbai for the

offences punishable under Section 420 read with 34 of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860 is settled between the parties and parties have

decided to file writ petition seeking quashing of the complaint.

3. Both the learned counsel state that Mr. Sohil Intikhab Alam

Hawaldar whose name is referred in the F.I.R. be impleaded as

party to this application as Respondent No.3.

4. Accordingly, leave as aforesaid is granted. Amendment be

carried out forthwith. Re-verification is dispensed with.

5. The prosecution case is set out in paragraph 2 of the order

dated 21 January 2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Panvel in Criminal Bail Application No.745 of 2025. The

said paragraph 2 of the order dated 21 January 2026 reads as

under :-

2. In short the prosecution case is that, Smt.Rohini Ramesh
Kalyankar, the wife of present applicant No.1 and mother of
applicant Nos.2 and 3 was the owner of Gut No.117/1, and
117/2/7 out of plot No.7, ad-measuring 174 sq.mtrs comprised in
sector No.16, Taloja Phase II. The applicant No.1 is the power of
attorney holder of Smt. Rohini Kalyankar. On 02/11/2004 he sold
aforesaid plot to one Vilas Kashinath Patil vide sale deed
No.7764/2004. Said Vilas Patil mortgaged the above mentioned

Page 2
PPN
908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC

property with Central Bank of India, Chembur branch and availed
loan. The said loan amount was transferred to the account of
present applicant No.1. The applicants were well aware that the
above mentioned property was mortgaged with Central Bank of
India, however, they hand in gloves sold said property to Sohel
Imtikhab Alam Hawaldar, the son of sister-in-law of informant
Mehmood Makbool Husain on 12/04/2025 by executing sale deed
No.2830/2024 at Sub-Registrar’s office, Class–II Panvel-1 for the
consideration of Rs.1,50,00,000/-. Thus applicants despite
knowing that the said property was mortgaged with Central Bank
of India sold it to Sohel Imtikhab Alam Hawaldar and thereby
deceived him. The informant thereafter approached Taloja police
station and lodged detailed report against applicants. On the basis
of report so lodged by informant an offence came to be registered
against applicants vide C.R.No. 433/2025 at Taloja police station
under above mentioned sections.

6. Thus, the main allegations against the present applicants is

that despite knowledge that the, subject property has been

mortgaged in the Central Bank of India, same is sold to Sohil

Intikhab Alam Hawaldar and the First Informant is the constituted

attorney of the said Sohil. Now the parties have arrived at the

consent terms and has stated that they will be filing the

proceedings seeking quashing of the F.I.R. The said consent terms

are signed by the Applicants and Respondent No.2 and newly

added Respondent No.3. Accordingly, the said consent terms are

taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification.

Page 3
PPN
908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC

7. As parties have decided to settle the dispute and have

decided to file the proceedings seeking quashing of F.I.R. and as

the dispute is also of civil in nature, case is made out for grant of

Anticipatory Bail. In view thereof, the following order is passed:

ORDER

(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicants in connection

with C.R. No.433 of 2025 registered with the Taloja

Police Station, Navi Mumbai, the Applicants are

directed to be released on bail on their furnishing P.R.

Bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one or two

solvent sureties each in the like amount.

(b) The Applicants shall attend the concerned Police

Station as and when called.

and residential address to the Investigating Officer

and shall keep the same updated, in case of any

change thereto.

(d) The Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make

any inducement, threat, or promise to any person

acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade

Page 4
PPN
908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC

such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or

to any Police personnel.

(e) The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution

evidence and shall not contact or influence the

Complainant or any witness in any manner.

8. The observations made in this order is only for the purpose

for considering the anticipatory bail application.

9. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 336 OF 2026

10. Stand over to 5 October 2026.

11. Ad-interim protection already granted shall remain in

operation till next date.

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

Page 5
PPN

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…