Bombay High Court
RAMESH KONDIBA PATILversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail is granted to the applicant as the prosecution failed to make out a prima facie case of knowledge of the embargo.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Ramesh Kondiba Patil, accused of offences under IPC sections 420, 406, 408 and 34 relating to alleged fraudulent sale of land parcels. The applicant owned the subject properties and, along with co‑accused, executed sale deeds to 29 investors between 2021‑2022. The prosecution alleged that the applicant knew of a Supreme Court‑mandated embargo on the lands (Gat Nos. 405 and 422) imposed in 2023 and still proceeded with the transactions, but failed to produce prima facie evidence of such knowledge at the time of the sales. The court examined the timing of the embargo, the lack of any revenue record restriction before 2023, and the prosecution’s affidavit, concluding that a prima facie case was not established. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to standard conditions, emphasizing that the order is limited to bail and does not address the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the applicant for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 408 and 34 of the IPC.
- Whether the applicant had knowledge of the Supreme Court‑mandated embargo on the subject lands at the time of executing the sale deeds.
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 34, 406, 408, 420
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- fraud
- property transaction
- knowledge
- embargo
- IPC sections 420, 406, 408, 34
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
36-BA-1883-26.doc
rsk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.1883 OF 2026
Ramesh Kondiba Patil .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Ms. Sana Raees Khan a/w. Mr. Devanand Bhosale for Applicant.
Mr. Amit A. Palkar, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Shette, PI, EOW, Pune.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 31, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Ms. Sana Raees Khan learned counsel for Applicant and
Mr. Amit A. Palkar, learned APP for Respondent-State.
2. By this Bail Application, Applicant-accused is seeking enlargement
on bail in Crime No.56 of 2025 registered with Wagholi Police Station,
Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 408, 34 of
IPC. Date of the incident is 21 October 2021 to 18 January 2024.
3. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with Crime No.56
Digitally signed
by
RAJESHWARI
of 2025 registered with Wagholi Police Station, Pune for the offences
RAJESHWARI SUBODH
SUBODH KARVE
KARVE Date:
2026.09.01
18:30:13
+0530
punishable under Sections 420, 406, 408, 34 of IPC.
1 of 5
36-BA-1883-26.doc
4. Applicant is arraigned as an accused person along with other
three accused persons in the present crime. He is accused No.1.
Admittedly, the applicant was the owner of the subject properties viz.,
Gat Nos.405 and 422 having bought them through registered
conveyances in the year 2011-2012 on which the applicant along with
three other accused persons carried out plotting of the said lands with
the idea of sale and developing the same as Vision Valley project to
prospective purchasers.
5. Twenty Nine investors showed interest and deposited money qua
taking interest by purchasing various plots by registered sale deeds.
According to the applicant each of the 29 investors executed registered
sale deeds qua the subject land parcels. After registration of the said
sale deeds some of the investors/purchasers sought mutation of their
names in regard to their transactions for purchase of the plotted plots
in Gat Nos.405 and 422 qua the subsisting mutation entries therein.
According to the prosecution case said twin Gat Nos. 405 and 422
were part of order passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal 13301
of 2025 and were restricted from any further transactions in view of
they being part of the firms belonging to Pearl Welfare Organization
Group of lands i.e. PACL Group for which investigation was going on.
According to prosecution case, petitioner despite having knowledge
about the aforesaid embargo proceeded with the execution of sale
deeds to investors/purchasers. This particular issue of applicant having
2 of 5
36-BA-1883-26.doc
knowledge has not been proved prima facie by the prosecution before
me. Today at this stage when the applicant has sought bail prima facie
case ought to be made out. Even otherwise it is prima facie seen that
the registered sale deeds/agreements which were executed and
registered by applicant and other co-accused persons are all in the year
2021-2022 with the investors and purchasers. The learned advocate for
the applicant submitted that at the time of execution of the said sale
deeds and registration thereof there was no embargo or entry in the
revenue record of the subject lands for Gat Nos.405 and 422. She
would submit that only allegation levelled in the complaint by the
complainant is that some of the investors were defrauded for a sum of
Rs.25 lakhs by the developers. It is seen that there was a legal stay on
the said property by virtue of an order dated 30 June 2023 on the
ground that the said land belonged to and was purchased by PACL
Limited and therefore its further sale was strictly prohibited by the
Justice Lodha Committee acting under the Supreme Court order.
However, insofar as transactions by the applicant in present case are
concerned, it is prima facie seen from the record that they were all of
the year 2021 and 2022 whereas the remark of any embargo in the
said mutation entry qua the said lands was effected only in the year
2023. If at all the applicant had any knowledge as according to the
prosecution case , the trial will prove his complicity. At the stage of
bail, learned counsel for the applicant has made out a prima facie case
3 of 5
36-BA-1883-26.doc
on the basis of the submissions made herein above and moreover the
affidavit in reply filed by the prosecution dated 26 August 2026 which
is considered by the Court also does not show the knowledge of the
Applicant at the time of execution and registration of the sale deeds.
Applicant is therefore released on bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant has made out case for
grant of bail. He is granted bail subject to following conditions:-
I) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with Crime No.56 of 2025 registered
with Wagholi Police Station, Pune ;
ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand
only) with one surety of the like amount;
iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Wagholi Police Station, once every month on the first
Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.;
iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and
attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically
exempted and will not take any unnecessary adjournments,
if he does so it will entitle the prosecution to apply for
revocation of this order;
4 of 5
36-BA-1883-26.doc
v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
vi) Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses
or tamper with the evidence in any manner;
vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of his current address and mobile contact number and / or
change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to
time, as applicable; and
viii) Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation
of bail granted to the Applicant.
7. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are limited
for the purpose of granting Bail only and I have not made any
observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on
the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being
uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made
hereinabove in this order.
8. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
rsk [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
5 of 5
Checking your session…