BALASO KRUSHNAT DHANGARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                            ba-1471-2024.doc


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   BAIL APPLICATION NO.1471 OF 2024
                                 WITH
                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3500 of 2025



Balaso Krushnat Dhangar                     ...Applicant
             Vs.
The State of Maharashtra                    ...Respondent

                              ——————
Mr. N. D. Patil (Through VC), Advocate for Applicant

Mr. Shishir Hirey, Public Prosecutor a/w. Veera Shinde, Anand
Shalgaonkar, APP for respondents-State.

Mr. Aditya S. Ghatge, Advocate for Intervenor.

Ms. Suvrana Patki, Dy. S.P. EOW Kolhapur present.
                              ——————

                                 Coram :    MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.,

                                 Reserved On   : 14th July 2026
                                 Pronounced On : 27th July 2026.

P. C. :

1.        Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Public

Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

2.        The applicant has approached this Court seeking regular bail in

connection with C.R. No.0917 of 2022, registered with Shahupuri Police



adn                              1 of 12
                                                          ba-1471-2024.doc


Station, District Kolhapur, for the offences punishable under Sections

406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and

Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors

(In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999.

3.    The informant Rohit Sudhir Otari lodged a complaint on

25/11/2022. The allegations are made against A.S. Traders and

Developers and the Directors of that Company. The informant was

introduced regarding different schemes of the said Company by Vijay

Patil and who alleged then he attended a seminar in May 2019 of the

Company run by Lohitsing Dharmsing Subhedar. Other persons, who

were introduced as Directors of the said Company had also attended the

seminar. Different plans were introduced and the benefits which were to

be given to the investors were also disclosed in the seminar. On basis of

the disclosure made and information provided by Lohitsing Subhedar and

others persons, the Complaint decided to invest the amount in different

plans and he invested Rs.25,00,000/ in his own name and also invested

different amount in the name of his relatives. The informant had then

come to know from others that there are different subsidiary Companies

having names A.S. Traders and Developers LLP, A.S. Traders Solutions

Limited, Comercio Vibrant LLP, Gainero Ventures LLP, Trexum Ventures

LLP, Capitus Ceker Traders and Developers LLP, Tradewings Solutions


adn                              2 of 12
                                                          ba-1471-2024.doc


Ltd., Vaibavlaxmi Finbiz Pvt.Ltd., Algowings Softech Pvt.Ltd., Tradewings

Gurukul Foundation, A.S. Token, D.M. Traders. The complainant initially

received the returns but then the Company stopped to give the returns as

per the assurance. The informant then started inquiry and came to know

that there are different persons, who have invested their amount in

different plans of the Company. On inquiry the total investment of

different persons was found to be Rs.4,89,72,649/ . He also came to

know the names of different persons as a directors of A.S. Traders and

Developers and subsidiary Companies. The informant accordingly lodged

the complaint to police station Shahupuri on 25/11/2022. On basis of the

same C.R. No. 917/2022, u/s. 406, 420 r.w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code

and U/s. 3, 4 of the M.P.I.D. Act came to be registered. During

investigation section 409 of Indian Penal Code was added in the crime.

The persons named earlier and different other persons who were found

as agents or partner of the main Company and subsidiary Companies

were added as an accused. The applicant is arrested on 16/09/2023. The

chargesheet is also submitted against the applicant and some of the co-

accused persons.

4.    Mr. N.D. Patil, learned counsel appearing for the applicant,

submitted that the chart annexed to the bail application itself

demonstrates that the applicant had invested a substantial amount of


adn                             3 of 12
                                                            ba-1471-2024.doc


Rs.63,34,360/- in A.S. Traders and Developers. According to the learned

counsel, the fact that the applicant himself invested such a huge amount

clearly indicates that he was also a victim of the fraud and had no

intention whatsoever to cheat any investor.

5.    He further submitted that the applicant is neither a Director of A.S.

Traders and Developers nor of any of its subsidiary companies. He was

never a Manager, employee or a person responsible for the day-to-day

affairs of the Company. The applicant had neither conducted any seminar

nor executed any agreement with the investors. He is not a signatory to

any cheque or bank account of the Company.

6.    Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant has remained

in judicial custody since 8th August 2023. The charge-sheet runs into

more than 12,000 pages and the prosecution has cited nearly 500

witnesses. Charges have not yet been framed and, therefore, the trial is

not likely to conclude within a reasonable period. Since the investigation

is complete and no further custodial interrogation is required, continued

detention of the applicant would amount to pre-trial incarceration. It is,

therefore, prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail.

7.    Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the

learned Sessions Judge, while rejecting the bail application, has

erroneously recorded that the applicant was a Director of Capitus Ceker


adn                              4 of 12
                                                            ba-1471-2024.doc


Traders and Developers LLP. He submitted that the records maintained by

the Registrar of Companies clearly indicate that one Babaso Bhopal

Dhangar, and not the present applicant, was the Director of the said

Company. According to him, the finding recorded by the learned Sessions

Judge is factually incorrect and has seriously prejudiced the case of the

applicant.

8.    Learned counsel further submitted that the investigation is

complete and no further recovery remains to be effected from the

applicant. Consequently, there is no possibility of the applicant tampering

with the prosecution evidence. The applicant has deep roots in society,

has no criminal antecedents and is willing to abide by any condition that

may be imposed by this Court. He further submitted that the applicant is

also entitled to claim parity with the co-accused, particularly Ms. Suvarna

Shrirang Sarnaik and others, who have already been enlarged on bail by

the learned Sessions Judge, Kolhapur.

9.    Per contra, Mr. Aditya Ghatge learned counsel appearing for the

complainant, vehemently opposed the bail application. He submitted that

the applicant cannot portray himself as a mere investor, as the material

collected during the course of investigation prima facie indicates that he

was an active participant in the affairs of A.S. Traders and Developers.

According to the learned counsel, the applicant was well aware of the


adn                              5 of 12
                                                             ba-1471-2024.doc


manner in which the investment schemes were operated and the role

played by the Company and its associates in collecting deposits from

innocent investors.

10.   Learned counsel for the complainant further submitted that the

applicant himself claims to have invested a substantial amount in the

Company. However, such investment, by itself, would not exonerate the

applicant from criminal liability if the material collected during the

course of investigation prima facie indicates his active participation in the

commission of the alleged offences.

11.   Placing reliance upon the judgment of this Court in Shrikant

Gangadhar Rao v. State of Maharashtra, Bail Application No.4049 of

2024, decided on 30th June 2025, learned counsel submitted that this

Court has held that where a large number of innocent investors have

been duped and huge public funds have been misappropriated, prolonged

incarceration by itself cannot be a ground to enlarge an accused on bail.

He submitted that although the accused in the said case had remained in

custody for a considerable period, this Court refused to grant bail after

balancing the gravity of the offence, the interest of the victims and the

larger societal impact of such economic offences.

12.   Mr. Shirish Hirey, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the

respondent-State, also opposed the application. Placing reliance upon the


adn                               6 of 12
                                                            ba-1471-2024.doc


judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Manik Madhukar Sarve & Ors.

v. Vitthal Damuji Meher & Ors reported in (2024) 10 SCC 753, he

submitted that economic offences constitute a class apart and are

required to be viewed with greater seriousness, as they undermine the

financial confidence of the public and have far-reaching consequences on

society.

13.    Mr. Hirey, learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the

material collected during the course of investigation discloses that the

applicant, along with his wife and son, was acting as an agent of A.S.

Traders and Developers. During the house search of the applicant, several

incriminating documents were recovered. The investigation further

reveals that the applicant had received commission, cash incentives and

other benefits, including a motorcycle and a car, on account of the

investment schemes floated by the Company. It is further alleged that the

applicant was associated with Tradewing Solutions Ltd., one of the

subsidiary companies, and had actively participated in the activities of the

Company. The vouchers recovered during the investigation also prima

facie indicate that substantial amounts of cash were received by the

applicant in his own name as well as in the names of his family members.

It is, therefore, submitted that having regard to the gravity of the

allegations and the material collected during the course of investigation,


adn                               7 of 12
                                                          ba-1471-2024.doc


this is not a fit case for grant of bail.

14.       I have gone through the documents produced by the prosecution

in support of the charges. The documents reveal that the main accused,

Lohitsingh Dharmisingh Subhedar, Amar Vishwas Chowgule, Bhikaji

Shivaji Kumbhar, Baburao Krishna Hazare, Vijay Jyotiram Patil, Adinath

Patil, along with other agents, directors and associates, were operating

the Company namely A.S. Traders and Developers, which had floated

various investment schemes by fraudulently inducing investors to deposit

their hard-earned money. The schemes promised returns ranging from

3% to 5% per month, along with incentives such as vehicles, foreign tours

and cruise trips. The accused had also floated and operated various

subsidiary companies, namely A.S. Traders Solutions Ltd., Vibrant

Trading LLP, Gainero Ventures LLP, Capitus Ceker Traders & Developers

LLP, Tradewing Solutions Ltd., Vaibhavlaxmi Finbiz Pvt. Ltd., Algowings

Softech Pvt. Ltd. and others. Prima facie, the modus operandi adopted by

the accused was to collect funds through banking channels as well as

cash. Initial returns were paid so as to build confidence amongst the

investors and thereafter the repayment of the principal amount and

promised returns was defaulted, resulting in the present fraud. The bank

accounts and other documents further reveal that the funds were routed

through various accounts of the Company, its directors, relatives and


adn                                  8 of 12
                                                           ba-1471-2024.doc


agents and part of the funds were diverted towards payment of

commission to agents, investment in cryptocurrency, acquisition of

various assets and transfer to related entities.

15.    The applicant has relied upon the judgment of the Aurangabad

Bench of this Court in Sudhir s/o. Ramrao Devkate vs. State of

Maharashtra, Bail Application No. 735 of 2024 with Bail Application

NO.742 o 2024 decided on 20th July 2024 wherein reliance has been

placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Javed Gulam

Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2024) 9 SCC 813.

This Court upon Javed’s Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra

(cited supra) granted bail on the ground that the investigation was

complete, the charge-sheet had already been filed, the offences included

Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code, the charge-sheet was voluminous,

a large number of witnesses were cited and there were no criminal

antecedents against the accused. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that

the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right of the accused as

enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

16.       In the present case also, it appears that though a Notification

dated 7th March 2025 has been issued appointing the Sub-Divisional

Magistrate, Karvir as the Competent Authority under the MPID Act, and

the properties standing in the name of A.S. Traders and Developers LLP


adn                                9 of 12
                                                            ba-1471-2024.doc


and its subsidiary companies have been attached by Notifications issued

under Sections 4 and 5 of the MPID Act, till date, both the learned Public

Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the applicant submit that the

charges are yet to be framed. The applicant is arrested on 8/8/2023

12,000 papers charge sheet is filed. The trial will take its own time to

conclude.

17.        The applicant was not a Director of A.S. Traders Compnay or any

other subsidiary company which had floated the ponzi shcmes. The

applicant himself has invested substantial amounts in the Company as

reflected from the affidavit filed by the prosecution. The applicant has no

criminal antecedents the applicant is behind bars since last 3 years

without trial.. I am inclined to exercise the discretion under Section 483

of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to release the applicant

on bail on the ground of prolonged incarceration by placing reliance

upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Javed Gulam Nabi

Shaikh (supra). The apprehension expressed by the learned Public

Prosecutor can be adequately taken care of by imposing stringent

conditions. Hence, the following order:

                                  ORDER

      (I) The Applicant, Balaso Krushnat Dhangar, shall be released on

      regular bail in connection with C.R. No.0917 of 2022 registered


adn                               10 of 12
                                                               ba-1471-2024.doc


      with Shahupuri Police Station, District Kolhapur, for the offences

      punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34

      of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra

      Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments)

      Act, 1999, on furnishing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-

      (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties in the like

      amount, subject to the following conditions:

       A) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station and

       report to the Investigating Officer twice in a month, i.e. on the

       1st and 15th of every month, commencing from 1st August

       2026, between 12.00 noon and 2.00 p.m., till the conclusion of

       the trial.

       B) The Applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Shahupuri

       Police Station, except for attending the Police Station as directed

       hereinabove, till the conclusion of the trial.

       C) The Applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses

       and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any

       manner.

       D) The Applicant shall furnish copies of his Aadhaar Card and

       PAN Card to the Investigating Officer and shall also furnish his

       detailed residential address, mobile number and the names,


adn                                 11 of 12
                                                              ba-1471-2024.doc


      addresses and mobile numbers of two of his near relatives.

      E) A single violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall

      entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of the bail granted to

      the Applicant.

      F) The Applicant shall deposit his Passport, if any, with the Trial

      Court and shall not leave the country without prior permission

      of the Trial Court.

18.     The Bail Application is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms.

The Interim Application, if any, does not survive and is accordingly

disposed of.

                                              [MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.]




adn                               12 of 12