Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SNEHA ASHISH SHAHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The Court allowed the interim application and granted bail on cash bail of Rs.15,000 with a personal bond, subject to further payment of Rs.6.64 lakh.

Summary

The applicant, Sneha Ashish Shah, was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for issuing a cheque of Rs.25 lakh and a compensation of Rs.84,000 was awarded to the respondent. A non‑bailable warrant was issued and the applicant was taken into custody, although the sentence had already been suspended. The applicant claimed to have paid Rs.19 lakh to the respondent and deposited an additional Rs.6 lakh before the court, while the respondent contended that only Rs.13.20 lakh had been received and warned that the applicant might abscond if released. The learned counsel for the applicant sought release on bail, whereas the respondent opposed it on the ground of incomplete payment and flight risk. The Court observed that the applicant had made a partial payment, the sentence was suspended, and directed the applicant to deposit Rs.6.64 lakh before the next date. Consequently, the interim application was allowed, the applicant was released on cash bail of Rs.15,000 with a personal bond of the same amount, and the application was disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the applicant, convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, should be released on bail despite partial payment of the liability.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Section 138 NI Act
  • cheque bounce
  • criminal revision
  • cash bail
  • suspended sentence

Judgment

                                                                                     905-IA-3168-2026 (CR).doc

                             S.S.Kilaje


                                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3168 OF 2026
                                                                 IN
                                            CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 205 OF 2022

                                   Sneha Ashish Shah                                    … Applicant
                                   VERSUS
                                   The State Of Maharashtra And Anr.                    … Respondents

                                   _________________________________________________________________

          Digitally signed
SONALI SATISH
       by SONALI
               KILAJE
                                   Mr. Shailesh Kantharia, Advocate for Applicant.
SATISH Date:
       2026.09.08
KILAJE 18:33:19
       +0530                       Mr. Balraj B. Kulkarni, APP for the Respondent-State.
                                   Mr. Shahwat Nehete i/b. Ms. Mallika Ingale, Advocate for the Respondent
                                   No.2.
                                   ________________________________________________________________

                                                                       CORAM     :   SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
                                                                       DATE      : 8th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
                                   P.C. :

                                   1.        Not on Board. Taken on Board.

                                   2.        Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned APP and

                                   learned counsel for respondent No.2.

                                   3.        It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the

                                   applicant has been convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable of

                                   Instruments Act, 1881 and Non Bailable Warrant was issued against her

                                   and she has been taken into custody. Learned counsel further submitted

                                   the cheque amount was of Rs.25 lakh and compensation was of

                                   Rs.84,000/-. Out of the said amount, the applicant has paid Rs.19 lakh to



                                                                  Page 1 of 3
                                                             905-IA-3168-2026 (CR).doc

S.S.Kilaje


      the respondent and today the applicant has deposited Rs.6 lakh before this

      Court. During the trial the applicant was on bail. The sentence of the

      applicant has already been suspended and requested to release the

      applicant on bail.

      4.             Learned counsel for the respondent strongly objected for

      releasing the applicant on bail. Leaned counsel submits that the applicant

      has not paid Rs.19 lakh as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant

      and respondent has received Rs.13,20,000/-. The applicant is avoiding to

      argue the matter before this Court. If applicant released on bail, he may

      abscond and requested to reject the application.

      5.            I have heard both the learned counsel. The applicant has paid

      some amount to the respondent and today he has deposited Rs. 6 lakh

      before this Court, respondent is disputing about depositing amount. The

      applicant shall deposit Rs.6,64,000/- before this Court before the next

      date.     As the sentence of the applicant is already suspended, I pass

      following order:

                                               ORDER

              i.       The Interim Application is allowed.

              ii.      The applicant be released on cash bail of Rs.15,000/- and

                       on furnishing P. R. Bond of the same amount.

              iii.     The bail bond to be furnished before the Trial Court.



                                        Page 2 of 3
                                                       905-IA-3168-2026 (CR).doc

S.S.Kilaje


      6.     Interim application stands disposed of.

      7.     All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.




                                                 (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)




                                   Page 3 of 3


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.