Bombay High Court

SUBHASH NARAYANRAO JOSHI DIED THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS CHABABAI SUBHASHRAO JOSHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED
Bench: MEHROZ K PATHAN

Holding

The Court allowed the withdrawal of the bail deposit to the legal heirs, subject to a bond and an undertaking to redeposit if the acquittal is later set aside.

Summary

The legal heirs of the deceased accused, Subhash Narayanrao Joshi, filed a criminal application seeking withdrawal of Rs. 7,08,000 deposited as a condition for anticipatory bail in a 2013 case involving offences under Sections 420, 406 and 34 IPC. The trial court had originally convicted Joshi, but the Additional Sessions Judge acquitted him on appeal on 11 November 2024, and the complainant's appeal was dismissed. Joshi died on 4 December 2024, and the heirs argued that, in view of the acquittal, the basis for retaining the deposit no longer existed. The State and the complainant opposed the withdrawal, contending that the heirs had not produced a succession certificate and that further challenges to the acquittal might arise. The Court held that, since the deposit was only to demonstrate bona fides for bail and no rival claim to the heirs’ status existed, the amount could be released, subject to the heirs furnishing a bond and an undertaking to redeposit if the acquittal is later set aside. Accordingly, the application was allowed with the stipulated conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the legal heirs of a deceased accused are entitled to withdraw the bail deposit after the accused's acquittal.
Whether the absence of a succession certificate bars the withdrawal of the deposited amount.
Whether the possibility of future challenges to the acquittal warrants imposing conditions on the withdrawal.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail deposit
acquittal
legal heirs
succession certificate
bond
criminal application
withdrawal of deposit

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:19762

999 CRI APPLN 2780 OF 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2780 OF 2025
IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.6428 OF 2013
Subhash Narayanrao Joshi Died Through Legal Heirs Chababai
Subhashrao Joshi
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another
…
• Mrs. Kulkarni Manjiri Achutrao, Advocate for Applicants
• Mr. P. D. Patil, APP for Respondent No. 1 - State
• Ms. Akshara S. Madake, Advocate (appointed) for Respondent
No. 2
…
CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.
DATED : 28.04.2026
PER COURT :

1. The present application is filed by the applicants, who are the

legal heirs of the original accused – Subhash Narayanrao Joshi,

seeking permission to withdraw the amount of Rs. 7,08,000/-

deposited before this Court pursuant to the order dated 12.02.2014

passed in Criminal Application No. 6428 of 2013.

2. Though notices were issued to the respondents, the original

complainant has not appeared. Hence, Ms. Akshara S. Madake,

learned Advocate, is appointed to represent Respondent No. 2 –

complainant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that by order dated

12.02.2014, this Court had directed the original accused – Subhash

Joshi to deposit an amount of Rs. 7,08,000/- as a condition for grant

Jhs/ 1/4
999 CRI APPLN 2780 OF 2025

of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 142 of 2013

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, and

34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the said amount was

deposited to demonstrate bona fides and compliance with the

conditions imposed by this Court.

4. It is further submitted that though initially the learned Trial

Court had convicted Subhash Joshi, subsequently, in appeal, the

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambajogai, District Beed, by

common judgment dated 11.11.2024 in Criminal Appeal No. 8 of

2018 (filed by Subhash Joshi) and Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2018

(filed by the complainant), allowed the appeal filed by Subhash Joshi

and acquitted him of the offences, while dismissing the appeal

preferred by the complainant.

5. Learned counsel submits that Subhash Joshi expired on

04.12.2024. The present applicants, being his legal heirs, are entitled

to receive the amount deposited by him, particularly in view of his

acquittal. It is thus prayed that the said amount along with accrued

interest be released in favour of the applicants.

6. Per contra, learned APP as well as the learned appointed

counsel for Respondent No. 2 oppose the application. It is submitted

that the applicants have not placed on record any succession

certificate or sufficient material to conclusively establish that they are

Jhs/ 2/4
999 CRI APPLN 2780 OF 2025

the only legal heirs of the deceased Subhash Joshi. It is further

submitted that there are no instructions as to whether any further

proceedings, including appeal against acquittal of accused Subhash

Joshi have been initiated. Hence, according to them, the amount

should not be released at this stage.

7. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned

counsel for the parties and have perused the material placed on

record, including the order dated 12.02.2014 and the judgment

dated 11.11.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Ambajogai.

8. The perusal of the order dated 12.02.2014 clearly indicates

that the amount of Rs. 7,08,000/- was directed to be deposited by the

accused as a condition for grant of anticipatory bail and only to

demonstrate his bona fides. The said amount was not directed to be

paid as compensation or restitution to the complainant.

9. It is an admitted position that the original accused – Subhash

Joshi has been acquitted of the offences by the Appellate Court and

the appeal preferred by the complainant has been dismissed. In view

of the acquittal, the basis for retention of the deposited amount no

longer survives.

10. As regards the objection relating to production of succession

certificate, it is to be noted that no rival claim has been brought on

Jhs/ 3/4
999 CRI APPLN 2780 OF 2025

record disputing the status of the present applicants as legal heirs of

the deceased. In absence of any competing claim, and considering the

nature of deposit, this Court finds no impediment in permitting

withdrawal of the said amount, subject to appropriate safeguards.

11. However, to balance the interest of justice, particularly in view

of the submission that there is no clarity regarding further challenge

to the acquittal, it would be appropriate to impose a condition

requiring the applicants to furnish an undertaking.

ORDER
A) The Criminal Application No. 2780 of 2025 is allowed.
B) The applicants are permitted to withdraw the amount of
Rs. 7,08,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eight Thousand only),
along with accrued interest, if any.
C) The aforesaid amount shall be released in favour of the
applicants upon the legal heirs of Subhash Joshi executing a
bond of Rs. 7,08,000/- and filing an undertaking before this
Court to the effect that, in the event any proceedings are
initiated and the acquittal of Subhash Joshi is set aside by a
competent Court, they shall redeposit the said amount along
with applicable interest, as may be directed.
12. In view of the above, the Criminal Application is disposed of.

13. Fees of the learned appointed counsel for Respondent No. 2

shall be quantified as per rules of the High Court Legal Aid Services

Sub-Committee

( MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J. )

Jhs/ 4/4

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…