CHANDRAKANT RAMCHANDRA SANGLIKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                               28.BA.2413.2026.doc

Ajay

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2413 OF 2026

       Chandrakant Ramchandra Sanglikar                 .. Applicant
             Versus
       State of Maharashtra and Anr.                    .. Respondents
                                   ....................
        Mr. Niranjan Mundargi a/w. Ms. Keral Mehta, Mr. Shailesh Kharat,
          Kanish Waghwase, Ms. Shalini Jaiswal, Advocates i/by Ajay S.
          Jaiswal for Applicant.
        Mr. Sukanta A. Karmakar, APP for Respondent No.2 – State.
        Mr. Rajiv Chavan, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Rohan Mahadik,
         Mr.Sunil Lahane, Ms. Mekhala More, Ms. Sonam Pandey, Ms. Asmi
         Desai, Ms. Siddhi Bhutada and Ms. Anjali Khapare, Advocates for
         Respondent No.2.
        API – Mr. Sachin Ghate, EOW, Pimpri Chinchwad present.
                                    ......…...........
                                   CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                   DATE         : SEPTEMBER 02, 2026.
       P.C.:
       1.        Heard Mr. Mundargi, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr.

       Karmakar, learned APP for Respondent No.1 – State and Mr. Chavan,

       learned Senior Advocate for Respondent No.2.


       2.        This is an Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

       Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking bail. The

       case of Applicant is for enlargement on bail in First Information Report

       (FIR) No.475 of 2025 dated 18.10.2025 registered with Bavdhan

       Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 419,

       465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short

       ‘IPC’).

                                                                           1 of 6
                                                       28.BA.2413.2026.doc


3.       According to the prosecution case, Applicant had absolute

knowledge about the right and entitlement of PACL, the Company

which had invested and purchased the subject lands claimed to be

belonging to the Applicant and notwithstanding that the Applicant

dealt with the same pursuant to 2016 / 2017.


4.       In so far as Applicant's case, which prima facie emanates

from the record is concerned, the Applicant was a Director of two

Companies called ‘Crest Entertainment & Media Pvt. Ltd.’ and ‘W.S.

Infra Pvt. Ltd.’ and in the name of these Companies, land parcels were

purchased by following the due process of law by the said Companies

in the year 2011 in various Gat Numbers of which there is no dispute.


5.       The prosecution case stems from the fact that the Company

called PACL had invested substantial amounts and was the purchaser

of these very land parcels in altogether separate transactions.

Therefore, between 2017 and 2023, in view of the proceedings which

were initiated and which ultimately went up to the Supreme Court, an

embargo was imposed by the Supreme Court in 2016 pursuant to the

directions passed after evaluating the Lodha Committee report in

September 2023. Though the Supreme Court passed a direction on

02.02.2016, the embargo with regard to dealing with the subject land

in the revenue record was mutated in Revenue Record only in

September 2023. The transactions of the Company were in the year



                                                                   2 of 6
                                                        28.BA.2413.2026.doc


2017 and therefore though Mr. Chavan has made a valiant effort to

persuade me to consider that the Applicant had knowledge of the said

embargo.    I am however unable to accept the same at this stage.

Undoubtedly, whether the Applicant was complicit in the offence and

had knowledge thereof will be proved at trial.


6.         With regard to receipt of moneys, the prosecution as well as

Mr. Chavan has persuaded me to consider that the prosecution has

prepared chart appended at Page No.66 which shows the amounts

received    by    the    Applicant's      Companies   from    the    four

investors/purchasers which is to the tune of approximately Rs.3.33

crores.


7.         Mr. Chavan, in his usual fairness has placed before the Court

the money trail unearthed by the prosecution on the basis of the bank

account statements of the Companies which had received the aforesaid

amount and the same prima facie show receipt of the said moneys

from the said investors/purchasers. Though the said issue has been

argued before me and the Court has been urged to impose a condition

for deposit of the said amount if the Court is inclined to release the

Applicant on bail, the prosecution in its own wisdom is undoubtedly

bound to unearth the properties of the Applicant and take appropriate

steps as may be available to it in law. I am not inclined to consider the

condition of deposit for grant of bail.



                                                                    3 of 6
                                                           28.BA.2413.2026.doc


8.        In so far as the hearing of the Bail Application is concerned

qua the role of the Applicant as a Director in the Companies concerned

and he being the Managing Director of the said Companies, in view of

the order passed on 31.08.2026 in the companion/similarly placed Bail

Application No.1883 of 2026 which covers the facts of the Applicant’s

case as well, I am inclined to allow the present Bail Application and

release the Applicant on bail.


9.        Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and

finding, Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the

following terms and conditions:-

          (i)   Applicant – Chandrakant Ramchandra Sanglikar is

                directed to be immediately released from prison in

                connection with FIR No.475 of 2025;


          (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on

                furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand

                only) with one or more sureties of the like amount;


          (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at

                Bhavdhan Police Station, once every week, on the

                Monday between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. until

                commencement of trial and thereafter shall attend all

                dates of hearing before the Trial Court;


          (iv) Applicant shall cooperate with the conduct of the trial

                                                                       4 of 6
                                                28.BA.2413.2026.doc


     and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates,

     unless specifically exempted. Applicant shall not seek

     unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall

     entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail;


(v) Applicant shall not deal with PACL properties or subject

     properties directly or indirectly in future;


(vi) Applicant shall not create any third party rights in

     property forming part of the present prosecution;


(vii) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or

     tamper with the evidence in any manner;


(viii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed

     of   their   current residential    address and mobile

     telephone number and shall forthwith inform the

     Investigating Officer of any change in their residential

     address or mobile telephone number, as and when such

     change occurs;


(ix) Applicant shall surrender his passport and shall not

     travel abroad without permission of the Trial Court; and


(x) Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid

     conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to

     the Applicant.


                                                            5 of 6
                                                                       28.BA.2413.2026.doc


       10.                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.


       11.                Bail Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms.




                                                          [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Ajay              Digitally
                  signed by AJAY
                  TRAMBAK
       AJAY       UGALMUGALE
       TRAMBAK
       UGALMUGALE Date:
                  2026.09.02
                  15:20:02
                  +0530




                                                                                   6 of 6