SANJAY NARAYAN HANGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                              BA-762-2026
                                     -1-

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                BAIL APPLICATION NO. 762 OF 2026


Sanjay s/o Narayan Hange                            ... Applicant
                                                    [Accused No.1]
      Versus

State of Maharashtra,
Through the Officer In-charge
Shivajinagar Police Station, Beed,
Taluka and District Beed.                           … Respondent

                               …..
Mr. Rajendrraa Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. Vishal Chavan
and Mr. Hashmi Ubaid S., Advocates for the Applicant.

Mr. A. B. Girase, PP for the Respondent-State.
                                  .....

                          CORAM :          ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
                          Reserved on          : 29.07.2026
                          Pronounced on        : 31.07.2026

ORDER :-

1.    Applicant seeks grant of regular bail on account of his arrest in

crime no. 544 of 2025 of registered at Shivajinagar Police Station,

District Beed, for offences punishable under Sections 61, 198, 199,

316(2), 316(5), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 351(4) of the Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 14 and 34 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996.
                                                         BA-762-2026
                                 -2-




2.    Bail is urged on the ground that applicant is falsely involved.

That he happens to be Revenue Assistant Officer. He has unblemished

25 years’ service career. He was supposed to be only handling files,

which were meant to be taken to the Collector. Moreover, for long

duration he was merely holding additional charge. He was also

transferred from Beed to Parali and after his transfer, above FIR has

been lodged on 19.11.2025, which, if taken at its face value, do not

prima facie constitute any offence against the applicant.      That,

applicant was already in police custody for nine days. Entire

investigation pertains to documentary evidence. Applicant was not in

the process of decision making or passing any award. There is no

incriminating material against him. There is also no material to link

him with other accused. That, he is not beneficiary of any amount.

Now investigation is over and chargesheet is already filed. Even his

voice sample as well as handwriting sample has been collected.

Mobile of applicant is already seized. Therefore, there is no need of

further custody and no purpose would be served by further detention.



3.    Learned counsel further pointed out that, applicant had no

direct access to the Collector. There is no documentary evidence or

evidence in any form to show that there was collusion with co-
                                                            BA-762-2026
                                  -3-

accused. Moreover, files carrying signatures of the Collector were not

in his sole custody. Learned counsel took this Court through the

statements of Nitin Katkar, Mahadev Jogdand, Yogini Jadhav and

Somnath Shinde and would submit that, there is no incriminating

material against present applicant. He is not signatory to any of the

awards or roznama. That he is not custodian of the files. That,

moreover, the inquiry committee which was constituted is changing

its stand from time to time. That there is pick and choose policy

adopted    by    inquiring   committee.   Moreover,    allegations   are

predominantly civil in nature. There was no notice served as required

under Section 35(3) of BNS before arresting applicant. There was no

complaint by any of the parties to the proceedings.



4.    Learned counsel further points out that co-accused, i.e. accused

no.5 is beneficiary of anticipatory bail by this Court and accused nos.

7, 9 and 10 have been granted interim protection. Applicant being the

sole bread earner of the family, and he being behind since long, and

there being not possibility of flight, so also on the ground of parity,

bail is urged for.



5.    While opposing the application, learned PP pointed out that,

investigation revealed revenue staff, including present applicant, to be
                                                             BA-762-2026
                                   -4-

involved in the above offence. According to learned PP, inquiry and

investigation revealed that, applicant was the main person who was in

direct contact with other accused (Collector). There are CDRs as well

as WhatsApp messages in that context. According to learned PP, in

fact applicant is the linchpin in the entire camp. That, there is huge

possibility of misusing liberty as certain files are still to be laid hand

on. On such count, bail is opposed.



6.    Perused the FIR dated 19.11.2025 which is at the instance of

one Satish Vasant Dhulam, a Deputy Collector of Land Acquisition.

Substance of the FIR is that, inspection and verification revealed that,

for a period from 24.04.2025 to 15.11.2025, in all 10 persons named

in the FIR, including the present applicant, had indulged in the

process of passing award on acquisition of land of various gat

numbers, and without any actual proceedings, or involvement of

parties, awards are shown to be passed and excessive amounts are

awarded by committing forgery and fabricating documents. Thereby,

there is loss to the Government to the tune of over Rupees 73.4 crore

and on above report, crime is registered for above offences.



7.    The modus operandi, alleged in the FIR is that, after transfer of

the then District Collector/Arbitrator on 24.04.2025, it was revealed
                                                              BA-762-2026
                                  -5-

to the succeeding Collector that, forged and backdated arbitration

orders were issued over the next six months in the name of the former

Arbitrator in several cases of acquisition of lands for National

Highway No. 211 and New Highway No. 52.



8.    Allegations against the applicant, who was Assistant Revenue

Officer, are that, by hatching conspiracy and in collusion with co-

accused persons, there is fabrication of documents and false

documents were manufactured to show process being completed in

order to extract enhanced/excessive compensation. Learned APP has

taken this Court through the statements of all stakeholders involved

in the award who have denied participating in or facing any

proceedings of arbitration. It is pointed out that, there is exorbitant

rise in amount of compensation awarded even when the parties had

not demanded, and they are also not shown to be beneficiaries of any

amount. It appears that, prior to lodging FIR, inquiry committee was

constituted and after thorough satisfaction, FIR is lodged.



9.    Prima facie there is ample material regarding involvement of

applicant who was the sole custodian of various files pertaining to the

awards of arbitration and he was said to be the linchpin as well as the

person in direct contact with the Collector, against whom also there
                                                            BA-762-2026
                                  -6-

are allegations of being involved in committing the above offence.

Therefore, with such nature of allegations, and considering the

gravity and magnanimity of the crime, this Court does not find it a fit

case to grant bail, more particularly when prosecution claims that

huge number of files, which were in the custody of applicant, are yet

not traced. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:

                               ORDER

                     The application is rejected.




                                          [ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]
vre