Bombay High Court
TANAJI RAGHUNATH LENGAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The anticipatory bail application is allowed, granting bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Tanaji Raghunath Lengare, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, fearing arrest in a case involving alleged forgery of a Power of Attorney and subsequent sale of property. The prosecution alleged that the sale deed executed on 26 February 2026 was based on a fabricated Power of Attorney, and that the applicant knowingly participated in the transaction. The applicant contended that he was merely a purchaser under a registered sale deed and had no role in the alleged forgery, also pointing to his prior bail in a separate offence. The court examined the documentary nature of the evidence, the lack of necessity for custodial interrogation, and the applicant's willingness to cooperate with the investigation. Concluding that the allegations did not justify arrest, the court granted anticipatory bail with specific conditions, including furnishing a bond and reporting to the investigating officer.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in a case involving alleged forgery and property fraud.
- Whether custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary given the documentary nature of the evidence.
- Whether the applicant's alleged knowledge of the forged Power of Attorney warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 35(3), 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302, 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- forgery
- property fraud
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail conditions
- documentary evidence
Judgment
1/6
44- ABA-471-2026 (CR).DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 471 OF 2026
Tanaji Raghunath Lengare …...Applicant
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. …...Respondents
----
Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde a/w Mr. Mervin Bardeskar, for Applicant.
Mr. Nitin B. Patil, A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 - State.
API, Mr. Shailesh Khedkar, Crime Branch, Solapur, present.
-------
Digitally
signed by
SHANTANU
SHANTANU SHANKARSA
SHANKARSA DHUDUM
DHUDUM Date:
2026.09.23
10:33:19
+0530
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C.
1. Heard Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde, learned Advocate for the Applicant
and Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 - State.
2. By this Application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), the Applicant seeks
pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 292 of
2026 registered at Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur, for offences
punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 61(2)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”).
Shantanu S. Dhudum
2/6
44- ABA-471-2026 (CR).DOC
3. Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states
that there are five (5) accused in Crime No.292 of 2026 and the Applicant
is Accused No.4.
4. The prosecution case is that the accused persons in Crime No.
292 of 2026 connived to forge documents in respect of the properties
owned by the Informant (Nilesh Pakale). The F.I.R. states that a false and
fabricated Power of Attorney was executed, creating the impression that
the Informant and his father (Virbhadra Pakale) had executed the Power of
Attorney in favour of Ajay Bagal (Accused No. 1). On the basis of the said
fabricated Power of Attorney dated 6 th February 2026, Ajay Bagal sold the
Informant's properties.
5. Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde, learned Advocate for the Applicant,
submits that the allegations in the crime are that Ajay Bagal, representing
himself to be the constituted Power of Attorney holder of the Informant
and his father, executed a sale deed dated 26th February 2026 in favour of
the Applicant and Raviraj Lengre (Accused No.2). He submits that the
Applicant purchased the property from Ajay Bagal by virtue of a registered
sale deed. He submits that apart from the allegation that the Applicant is
the purchaser in the sale deed dated 26 th February 2026, the Applicant has
no other involvement in Crime No. 292 of 2026. He submits that Ajay
Bagal, Raviraj Lengre, and Kalyan M. Babar (Accused No. 5) in Crime No.
292 of 2026 have been released on Regular bail/Anticipatory Bail. He
Shantanu S. Dhudum
3/6
44- ABA-471-2026 (CR).DOC
further submits that Dayanand Swami (Accused No.3) has been issued
notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023. He submits that the
Applicant is not involved in the crime, that he shall appear before the
Investigation Officer and cooperate in the investigation.
6. Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 –
State, submits that although the allegations in Crime No. 292 of 2026 are
that the Applicant, along with Raviraj Lengre, purchased the property from
Ajay Bagal by executing the sale deed dated 26 th February 2026, the said
sale deed was executed on the basis of a fabricated Power of Attorney by
Ajay Bagal. He further submits that the Applicant was aware that the
Power of Attorney was fabricated and despite that knowledge, executed the
sale deed. He submits that the Applicant has an antecedent in respect of an
offence under Sections 498A and 302 of the IPC.
7. Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde, learned Advocate for the Applicant, in
rejoinder, submits that the Applicant has been granted bail in the offence
referred to by Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 –
State.
8. Perused the record with the assistance of the learned Advocates
appearing for the parties.
9. The allegations against the Applicant in Crime No. 292 of 2026,
as submitted by Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde, learned Advocate for the Applicant,
Shantanu S. Dhudum
4/6
44- ABA-471-2026 (CR).DOC
are that the Applicant purchased the property by virtue of a sale deed
dated 26th February 2026, which the Informant claims is his. Ajay Bagal is
alleged to have executed the said sale deed based on the Power of Attorney
of the Informant and his father, which is alleged to be forged. The case is
essentially based on documentary evidence.
10. Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 –
State, on instructions, submits that the documents which are the subject
matter of Crime No.292 of 2026 have been seized by the Investigating
Officer.
11. Ajay Bagal and Raviraj Lengre have been granted Regular Bail.
Kalyan M. Babar (Accused No.5) has been granted Anticipatory Bail by this
Court vide order dated 17th June 2026 in Anticipatory Bail Application No.
308 of 2026.
12. Considering the nature of the allegations against the Applicant
and the circumstances referred to hereinabove, custodial interrogation of
the Applicant in Crime No. 292 of 2026 is not required.
13. This Application is allowed on the following conditions:
ORDER
A) In the event of arrest of the Applicant – Tanaji Raghunath
Lengare, in Crime No.292 of 2026 registered with Sadar
Shantanu S. Dhudum
5/6
44- ABA-471-2026 (CR).DOC
Bazar Police Station, Solapur, for the offences punishable
under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2)
of the BNS, the Applicant shall be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount
to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, Sadar Bazar
Police Station, Solapur.
B) The Applicant shall appear and report before the
Investigating Officer at Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur
on 28th, 29th and 30th September 2026 from 10:00 a.m. to
1:00 p.m. and thereafter as and when required by the
Investigating Officer, Sadar Bazar Police Station, Solapur.
The Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation of
Crime No.292 of 2026.
C) The Applicant shall on 28 th September 2026 provide the
Investigating Officer with his residential address along with
proof thereof, his contact number and shall inform the
Investigating Officer of any change in the said information
from time to time.
D) The Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted
Shantanu S. Dhudum
6/6
44- ABA-471-2026 (CR).DOC
with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from
disclosing the facts to the Court or to any police officer.
E) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence, in any
manner.
14. The observations made in this order are prima facie relevant
to deciding the Bail Application and will not affect the trial.
15. Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No.471 of 2026 is
disposed of.
( ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Shantanu S. Dhudum
Checking your session…