Bombay High Court
Kedar Prakash VanjapeversusThe State of Maharashtra
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The applicant is discharged from all charges and the impugned order is quashed as there is no evidence of his personal involvement in the alleged offences.
Summary
The applicant, Kedar Prakash Vanjape, was a senior employee of D.S. Kulkarni Developers Ltd (DSKDL) who resigned in 2009. He was later implicated in a case alleging that his wife purchased land and sold it to DSKDL at a high price, and that the company accepted public deposits from investors without proper authorization, leading to charges of cheating, conspiracy and other offences under the IPC and the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act. The Sessions Judge rejected the applicant's discharge application, but on revision the High Court held that the applicant had no personal involvement in the land transaction or the acceptance of deposits after his resignation, and that liability cannot be imputed merely by relationship or past employment. The Court found no material evidence linking the applicant to the alleged conspiracy and noted that the Serious Fraud Investigation Office had given a clean chit to the transactions. Consequently, the revision application was allowed, the impugned order was quashed, and the applicant was discharged of all charges.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant can be held liable under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act and the IPC for alleged conspiracy and cheating despite having resigned before the alleged offences.
- Whether the revision application is maintainable in place of an appeal against the Sessions Judge's order.
- Whether the applicant's personal relationship with the accused and past employment constitute sufficient basis for criminal liability.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 120-B, 34, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471
- Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- criminal liability
- conspiracy
- public deposits
- MPID Act
- cheating
- corporate fraud
- discharge
- revision
- personal liability
- relationship liability
Judgment
5-REVN-52-2026 (CR) Draft1(4).doc
N.S.Kamble
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION. NO. 52 OF 2026
Kedar Prakash Vanjape ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
____________________________________________________________
Mr. Sandesh More a/w Mr. Hitendra Gandhi, Mr. Om Gandhi, Mr. Akash
NILAM
Digitally signed
by NILAM Sawale, for the Applicant.
SANTOSH
SANTOSH KAMBLE
KAMBLE Date:
2026.09.28
18:05:29 +0530 Mr. K.L. Vyas, SPP a/w Mr. S.S. Hiray, PP and Mr. B.B. Kulkarni, APP for
Respondent-State.
Mr. Asaram Shete, PI a/w Mr. Khobragade, ASI, EOW, Pune City.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :
. The challenge in this Application is to the impugned order
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Court, Pune
rejecting Discharge Application of the Applicant.
2. It is prosecution’s case that the Applicant and co-accused lured
investors to deposit money in their company with an assurance of handsome
returns on it. After depositing the amount, they neither gave the promised
returns on the invested amount nor returned the money.
3. It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that in the
year 2002, the Applicant joined D.S. Kulkarni Developers Ltd.
Page 1 of 8
5-REVN-52-2026 (CR) Draft1(4).doc
N.S.Kamble
(‘DSKDL’ for short) and worked in various capacities. In August 2009, the
Applicant resigned from all positions and severed connections with the
DSKDL group. In the year 2010 and onwards, the alleged offences of
collection of public deposits and misappropriation of funds surfaced long
after his resignation from service. The learned counsel further submitted
that Shri. D.S. Kulkarni and his family raised Fixed deposits in the name of
his family-owned company and the Applicant was never a part of any of
these family firms.
4. The learned counsel further submitted that on 28 th October
2017, FIR was registered against Shri. D.S. Kulkarni and co-accused. The
Applicant’s name was added in the present crime on the basis of
supplementary charge-sheet. After registration of offence, the investigation
was extended to certain land transactions at Fursungi, Pune which was
alleged to have caused wrongful loss to the shareholders of DSKDL and
illegal gain to Shri. D.S. Kulkarni and his relatives including the wife of the
Applicant.
5. The learned counsel further submitted that the main allegations
against the Applicant are that wife of Applicant - Saee Vanjape, who is niece
of Shri. D.S. Kulkarni, had purchased land at Fursungi from farmers. Later,
she sold the said land to DSKDL at a huge price within few months of
Page 2 of 8
5-REVN-52-2026 (CR) Draft1(4).doc
N.S.Kamble
purchasing it. At that time, the Applicant was Vice President of DSKDL.
The learned counsel further submitted that the Applicant has no connection
with the said land transactions, as it was purchased by the resolution of
Directors of DSKDL and the Applicant was merely an employee of DSKDL.
6. The learned counsel further submitted that on the basis of the
charge-sheet filed by the Investigating Agencies, Ministry of Corporate
Affairs had appointed Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO). The said
authority has conducted the investigation of present offence and has given a
clean chit to the aforesaid transactions and treated it as legal. The learned
counsel further submitted that the investigation of Fursungi land deal was
carried out by the Investigating Officer without any complaint or statement
by the shareholders. The learned counsel further submitted that there is no
case at all against the Applicant, but these facts have not been considered by
learned Sessions Judge and has passed impugned order, which is erroneous
and requested to allow the Application.
7. It is contention of learned SPP that the present Revision
Application is not maintainable as an Appeal should have been filed against
the order of MPID Court. The learned SPP further submitted that plots of
land were purchased by the Applicant at Fursungi as an authorized signatory
to DSKDL company. The learned SPP further submitted that the Applicant
Page 3 of 8
5-REVN-52-2026 (CR) Draft1(4).doc
N.S.Kamble
held various positions in DSKDL. The wife of Applicant had purchased
land at Fursungi from the farmers and the said land was sold to DSKDL at
higher prices within seven months of the said transaction. During the
relevant period, the Applicant was Vice-President and Executive Director of
DSKDL.
8. The learned SPP further submitted that there are statements of
witnesses Ms. Gauri Patil and Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi which show involvement
of the Applicant in the present crime. They have stated that the Applicant
was present in the meeting with Shri. D.S. Kulkarni. The learned SPP
further submitted that statements of witnesses Mr. Amol Rakhvi, Ms.
Chaitali Dharmadhikari and Mr. Madhukar Waikar have been recorded.
They have stated that they had invested the amount in DSKDL in the year
2008, when the Applicant was working in the said company. There is prima
facie case against the Applicant and the Applicant can put forth his defense
at the time of trial. The learned Sessions Judge has passed a well-reasoned
order, no interference is required in it and requested to reject the
Application. He relied on Neelam Rajendra Nanaware V/s. The State of
Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No.350 of 2025.
9. Heard rival submissions. Perused impugned order and
documents produced on record.
Page 4 of 8
5-REVN-52-2026 (CR) Draft1(4).doc
N.S.Kamble
10. Admittedly, the Applicant had resigned from DSKDL in the year
2009. The main allegations against the Applicant are that his wife Saee had
purchased land at Fursungi from farmers and sold it to DSKDL at a higher
price within seven months of purchasing the said land. At that time, the
Applicant was working as Vice President of the Engineering Department
(DSKDL). The wife of the Applicant is the niece of main accused Shri. D.S.
Kulkarni. In my view, the land was purchased by DSKDL. It was the
decision of the Board of Directors of the said company. The Applicant
cannot be held responsible for the said transaction and cannot be considered
as a conspirator, as he was merely a salaried employee of DSKDL. Moreover,
the wife of the Applicant has been arraigned as an Accused in the present
crime. The wife’s relationship with the main accused cannot, by itself, create
criminal liability on the part of the Applicant. Criminal liability is personal
in nature and cannot be imposed merely on the basis of marriage,
relationship, or past employment, in the absence of material establishing the
Applicant’s involvement in the commission of the offence. In respect of
allegations of cheating the investors, it appears from the statement of witness
Ms. Gauri Patil that there was a dispute between the Applicant and Mrs.
Hemanti Kulkarni in the year 2009, due to which the Applicant left his job.
She has stated that in January 2010, she was called to the office of Shri. D.S.
Page 5 of 8
5-REVN-52-2026 (CR) Draft1(4).doc
N.S.Kamble
Kulkarni by the co-accused and directed to accept money deposits from the
people. She further stated that in November 2013, to evade the legal hassles
of SEBI and RBI’S restrictive conditions, it was decided that deposits be
accepted from the investors in a newly planned manner. Statement of this
witness shows that DSKDL and other companies started accepting the
deposits from the investors from January-2010. At that time, the Applicant
was not working in the said company, so it cannot be said that the Applicant
was part of the conspiracy or was aware about the acceptance of said
deposits. The statement of Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi and Ms. Gauri Patil shows
that when they visited the house of Shri. D.S. Kulkarni, the Applicant was
present. In my view, mere presence of the Applicant at the house of his
employer cannot be a ground to involve him in the present crime. The
statement of Mr. Amol Rakhvi shows that he had invested the amount in
office of DSKDL at their Mumbai office and re-invested it in year 2011 after
a talk with Shri. Deepak Kulkarni. So, there is no concern of the present
Applicant.
11. As observed earlier, the Applicant had resigned from DSKDL in
the year 2009. The deposits were accepted from the people in the year 2010
when the Applicant was no longer an employee of DSKDL. His wife has
been arraigned as an accused in the present crime for alleged land
Page 6 of 8
5-REVN-52-2026 (CR) Draft1(4).doc
N.S.Kamble
transactions. There is no case at all made out against the Applicant, but these
facts have not been considered by the learned Sessions Judge.
12. It is contention of the learned SPP that the present Application is
not maintainable. In my view, as the Applicant had resigned from DSKDL
before accepting the deposits from investors. He was a salaried employee of
DSKDL. Moreover, there are no specific allegations against the Applicant
about using the deposited amount. Therefore, provisions of MPID Act
would not be applicable against the Applicant. Hence, present Application is
maintainable. Continuing the case against the Applicant would amount to
an abuse of process of law.
13. I have gone through the case laws cited by the learned SPP. The
facts of cited case and the present case are different, hence, not applicable.
14. In view of above, I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) The Application is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 29th October 2025 passed in
MPID Special Case No.874 of 2022 is hereby quashed and set
aside.
(iii) The Applicant is discharged from the charges levelled
under Section 120-B, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 109
Page 7 of 8
5-REVN-52-2026 (CR) Draft1(4).doc
N.S.Kamble
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections
3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors
(in Financial Establishments), Act, 1999.
(iv) All pending Applications are disposed of.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 8 of 8
Checking your session…