RAJESH MARUTI PADALKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                            ba-42-2026.doc


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

                     BAIL APPLICATION NO.42 OF 2026
                                  WITH
                   INTERIM APPLICATION NO.98 OF 2026

Rajesh Maruti Padalkar                           ...Applicant
      Vs.
The State of Maharashtra                         ...Respondent
                            ——————
Mr. Ramnik Pawar (Through VC) i/b. Mr. Amit Waykool, Advocate for the
Applicant.
Mr. Shishir Hirey, Public Prosecutor a/w. Veera Shinde, Anand
Shalgaonkar, APP for respondents-State.

Mr. Jayant Bardeskar (Through V.C.) with Adv. Ahilya Nalawade with
Adv. Nakul V. Shukla, 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 the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, the

learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State and the learned

counsel appearing for the complainant.

2.        The present application is preferred under Section 483 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in

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



adn                               1 of 13
                                                            ba-42-2026.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 lodged complaint on 25/11/2022 stating that he

has introduced to different schemes of by Vijay Patil and 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      information provided by

Lohitsing Subhedar and others persons, the informant 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 Ltd., Vaibavlaxmi Finbiz Pvt.Ltd., Algowings

Softech Pvt.Ltd., Tradewings Gurukul Foundation, A.S. Token, D.M.

Traders. The informant initially received the returns but then the


adn                              2 of 13
                                                             ba-42-2026.doc


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

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.    Initially, the Company honoured its commitments by paying

returns. However, it subsequently defaulted in repayment of the principal

amounts as well as the promised returns. Upon making enquiries, the

first informant learnt that a large number of investors had invested huge

amounts in A.S. Traders and Developers and its subsidiary companies.

Consequently, the First Information Report came to be lodged. During the


adn                              3 of 13
                                                               ba-42-2026.doc


course of investigation, Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code came to be

added, the present applicant was arrested and thereafter the charge-sheet

as well as supplementary charge-sheets came to be filed.

5.      Mr. Ramnik Pawar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant,

submitted that the present application is filed primarily on the grounds of

prolonged incarceration and the deteriorating medical condition of the

applicant. He submitted that an earlier bail application was withdrawn

on 18th November 2025 with liberty to approach the Sessions Court on

medical grounds. It is submitted that the present application is, therefore,

maintainable in view of the subsequent developments relating to the

applicant's health. The learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance

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

Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2024) 9 SCC 813, and

submitted that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right

guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It was submitted

that the charge-sheet filed in the present case is voluminous, the charges

have not yet been framed, and there is no likelihood of the trial

concluding in the near future. It was, therefore, contended that the

continued incarceration of the applicant would amount to pre-trial

detention and, on that ground, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on

bail.


adn                               4 of 13
                                                              ba-42-2026.doc


6.      The learned counsel further submitted that the applicant was

neither a Director nor a partner of A.S. Traders and Developers or any of

its subsidiary entities. According to him, the applicant himself had

invested his personal funds in the Company and had, in fact, become a

victim of the alleged fraud. It was further submitted that the applicant is

suffering from serious psychiatric ailments, including Major Depressive

Disorder, and is undergoing continuous psychiatric treatment. In these

circumstances, it is urged that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on

bail.

7.      Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant is a Diploma

Holder in Mechanical Engineering, aged about 48 years, having a family

comprising his wife and children, who are dependent upon him. It is

submitted that the applicant is also suffering from diabetes and other

medical ailments. According to the learned counsel, before his arrest, the

applicant had fully cooperated with the investigation by responding to

the notice issued under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

and had, therefore, never attempted to evade the investigation.

8.      It is further submitted that several co-accused, namely Shivaji

Dhondiram Shinde, Vinayak Vilas Sutar, Ashwini Gawade, Pratik Madde,

Suvarna Sarnaik, Rohit Ghevade and Pratapsingh Shevale have already

been granted bail by the competent Courts. The applicant, therefore,


adn                              5 of 13
                                                               ba-42-2026.doc


claims parity with the said co-accused. It is also submitted that the

applicant has remained in custody for a considerable period and the trial

is not likely to conclude in the near future.

9.    The learned counsel further submitted that the investigating

agency has already attached the residential house constructed by the

applicant together with one vacant plot standing in his name. According

to the prosecution itself, the alleged misappropriation attributable to the

applicant is approximately Rs.78 Lakhs, whereas immovable properties of

equivalent or higher value have already been secured during the course

of investigation. It is, therefore, submitted that nothing further remains to

be recovered from the applicant and his continued incarceration would

serve no useful purpose. The learned counsel accordingly prayed that the

applicant be released on regular bail.

10.   Per contra, Mr. Bardeskar, the learned counsel appearing for the

complainant opposed the application. He submitted that the plea raised

by the applicant regarding his medical condition is wholly misconceived.

According to the learned counsel, the photographs and other material

collected during the course of investigation prima facie indicate that the

applicant was actively conducting seminars and participating in

promotional activities organised by A.S. Traders and Developers for

attracting prospective investors. It was, therefore, submitted that the


adn                                6 of 13
                                                              ba-42-2026.doc


applicant cannot portray himself as a mere victim of the alleged fraud.

11.   The learned counsel for the complainant further submitted that the

judgments relied upon by the applicant are distinguishable on facts and

have no application to the present case. Placing reliance upon the

decisions in Manik Madhukar Sarve and Others v. Vitthal Damuji Meher

and Others, reported in (2024) 10 SCC 753, Jayant Sanjeeva Shetty v.

State of Maharashtra (Bail Application No.4989 of 2024) and Shrikant

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

2024, decided on 30th June 2025), it was submitted that prolonged

incarceration, by itself, cannot constitute a ground for grant of bail in

serious economic offences involving large-scale cheating of innocent

investors. He submitted that economic offences have far-reaching

consequences on society and, therefore, deserve to be viewed differently

while considering an application for bail. It was, therefore, prayed that

the application be rejected.

12.   Mr. Shishir Hirey, learned Public Prosecutor, also opposed the

application. He submitted that the material collected during the course of

investigation prima facie indicates that the applicant, along with his wife

and son, was functioning as an agent of A.S. Traders and Developers.

During the search conducted at the residence of the applicant, several

incriminating documents came to be recovered. According to the


adn                              7 of 13
                                                             ba-42-2026.doc


prosecution, the investigation further reveals that the applicant had

received commission, cash incentives and other benefits, including a

motorcycle and a car, in consideration of procuring investments for the

Company.

13.   The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the applicant

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

companies of A.S. Traders and Developers, and had actively participated

in promoting the investment schemes floated by the Company. It is

submitted that the vouchers recovered during the course of investigation

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. According to the prosecution, the investigation further

discloses that, on account of the inducement made by the applicant,

several investors deposited amounts aggregating to approximately Rs.78

Lakhs with the Company. The applicant is also alleged to have received

valuable benefits, including motor vehicles and other monetary

incentives, from the proceeds of the alleged crime.

14.   The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the applicant

is receiving appropriate psychiatric treatment while in judicial custody

and that the report received from the Superintendent of the Central

Prison indicates that all necessary medical treatment is being provided to


adn                              8 of 13
                                                              ba-42-2026.doc


him. Therefore, according to the prosecution, the medical condition of

the applicant does not constitute a valid ground for grant of bail. It was

further submitted that the applicant has criminal antecedents and, if

released on bail, there is every likelihood of his influencing witnesses,

tampering with the prosecution evidence or indulging in similar offences.

Relying upon the decisions in Manik Madhukar Sarve (supra) and

Shrikant Gangadhar Rao (supra), the learned Public Prosecutor

submitted that economic offences, having a serious impact upon society

and the financial system, stand on a different footing while considering

an application for bail. It was, therefore, prayed that the application be

rejected.

15.   I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned

counsel appearing for the applicant, the learned Public Prosecutor for the

respondent-State and the learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

I have also carefully perused the charge-sheet, the supplementary charge-

sheets, the material collected during the course of investigation and the

documents placed on record.

16.   Prima facie, the prosecution case reveals that the principal accused,

namely Lohitsingh Dharmisingh Subhedar and other Directors and office-

bearers of A.S. Traders and Developers, floated various investment

schemes assuring attractive monthly returns and other incentives with the


adn                              9 of 13
                                                                ba-42-2026.doc


object of inducing members of the public to invest substantial amounts.

The prosecution further alleges that the funds so collected were diverted

through various subsidiary companies and that a large number of

investors suffered substantial financial loss.

17.   The prosecution has attributed a specific role to the present

applicant. According to the prosecution, the applicant was associated

with the activities of the Company and had participated in canvassing the

investment schemes. The prosecution has also relied upon the

documents, vouchers and other material recovered during the course of

investigation to contend that the applicant received commission and

other monetary benefits. However there are no documents placed on

record to show that the Applicant was Director of AS Traders or any other

subsidiary company. These allegations are undoubtedly serious and will

have to be examined at the trial. At this stage, however, this Court is not

expected to undertake a detailed appreciation of the evidence or record

any conclusive finding on the merits of the prosecution case.

18.   It is not in dispute that the investigation has been completed and

the charge-sheet as well as supplementary charge-sheets have already

been filed. Admittedly, the charges are yet to be framed. The prosecution

has cited a large number of witnesses and the charge-sheet is

voluminous. Having regard to the nature of the prosecution evidence, the


adn                               10 of 13
                                                               ba-42-2026.doc


trial is not likely to conclude within a reasonable period. The applicant

has remained in judicial custody for a considerable length of time from

16th September 2023. The applicant has also placed material on record

indicating that he has been undergoing psychiatric treatment. Though the

learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that adequate medical treatment

is being provided by the jail authorities, the medical condition of the

applicant   is   also   a   relevant   circumstance   which   deserves   due

consideration while considering the prayer for bail.

19.   Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case,

the completion of investigation, the filing of the charge-sheet and

supplementary charge-sheets, the period of incarceration already

undergone by the applicant, the stage of the trial and the medical

condition of the applicant, I am of the considered view that further

detention of the applicant is not warranted at this stage. The Hon'ble

Supreme Court, in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra ,

reported in (2024) 9 SCC 813, has held that, howsoever grave the

offence may be, the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right

guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the present

case, the charge-sheet runs into more than 12,000 pages and

supplementary charge-sheets have also been filed. The charges have not

yet been framed and, therefore, the trial is not likely to conclude within a


adn                                11 of 13
                                                               ba-42-2026.doc


reasonable period. The apprehension expressed by the prosecution that

the applicant may influence witnesses or tamper with the prosecution

evidence can be adequately addressed by imposing stringent conditions

while enlarging the applicant on bail. Without expressing any opinion on

the merits of the case, I am inclined to exercise the discretion under

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in favour

of the applicant. Hence, the following order:

                                   ORDER

(I) The Applicant, Rajesh Maruti Padalkar, shall be released on regular

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


adn                               12 of 13
                                                               ba-42-2026.doc


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, 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                                 13 of 13