5-APL-1817-2019.doc N.S.Kamble IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1817 OF 2019 Maya Rajesh Bhatt and Ors … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr … Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Dr.Uday P. Warunjikar a/w Ms.Aishwarya R. Tuwar i/b Mr.Aditya P. Kharkhar, for the Applicants. Mr.P.P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State. Mr.Vaibhav Parab, for Respondent No.2. ____________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 17th FEBRUARY 2026 P.C. : . The challenge in this Application is the order dated 7th November 2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mumbai below Exhibit-2 thereby confirming the order dated 13th December 2016, passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Bandra, Mumbai, issuing process against the Applicants under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’ for short). 2. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Applicants that NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Digitally signed by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date: 2026.03.07 10:20:52 +0530 5-APL-1817-2019.doc N.S.Kamble the Applicants were office bearers of the Madhu Park Co-operative Housing Society Limited (‘Society’ for short). The redevelopment plan of the said society was approved by the Municipal Corporation after thorough inspection. Respondent No.2/Original Complainant was Secretary of the said Society. He later resigned from the Secretaryship. 3. It is alleged that the Applicants and original Accused Nos.1 to 3 flagrantly changed the building plans and forged the signatures of Respondent No.2 and his wife on resolutions dated 4th July 2013 and 12th August 2013. 4. The learned counsel further submitted that, in fact, Respondent No.2 has settled the matter with the builder/ Accused Nos.1 to 3 and he is using parking and other facilities. The Respondent No.2 has received the possession of the flat, so by the said resolutions, no loss has been caused to Respondent No.2. The said resolutions were passed in the interest of the society. The allegations attracting the provisions of the IPC are not made out against the Applicants, but this fact is not considered by the learned Magistrate nor the Sessions Court and requested to allow the Application. 5. It is contention of the learned counsel for Respondent No.2 5-APL-1817-2019.doc N.S.Kamble that Applicant Nos.1 to 3 were office bearers of the society, where the Respondent No.2 owns the flat. The Applicants have passed two resolutions behind the back of Respondent No.2. In the said resolutions, signatures of the Respondent No.2 and his wife were forged by the Applicants. It shows prima facie case against them. To prove that the Applicants were not involved in the crime, trial is required. The learned Magistrate Court and Sessions Court have passed well-reasoned order, no interference is required in it and requested to reject the Application. 6. The learned APP submits that appropriate order be passed. 7. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused impugned orders. 8. The Respondent No.2 has filed private complaint against original Accused Nos.1 to 3 builder/developer of the said society alleging that in his absence, Applicants in connivance with each other, passed resolutions on behalf of the society pertaining to the administration of the society, thereby giving advantage to the builder to access car parking space and allot the same illegally, which never belonged to the Developer and belonged to the Society, since inception of the building. In order to proceed with the re-development, with an ulterior motive to deceive Respondent No.2, they have forged his signature and his wife's signature 5-APL-1817-2019.doc N.S.Kamble on the resolutions dated 4.7.2013 and 12.8.2013 passed by the society which he and his wife never signed. It is alleged that the resolutions are forged and fabricated and originals are in the custody of the Committee and/or the builder. A detailed investigation is humbly prayed for to ascertain the offence committed and bring out the truth. It is alleged that the original Accused Nos. 1 to 3 and the Applicants have committed the offence of cheating, forgery, criminal breach of trust and criminal conspiracy in connivance with each other to ensure wrongful gain to them and wrongful loss to Respondent No.2. In the complaint, it is stated that as a member of the society, Respondent No.2 is entitled to his proportionate share of the amount and equivalent area of the new flats in proposed construction as a matter of right. 9. Admittedly the Respondent No.2 has settled the matter with builder/Accused Nos.1 to 3, against whom same allegations were levelled like the Applicants, and complaint against them has been withdrawn by the Respondent No.2. Perused impugned resolutions, it appears that in these resolutions, the issue relating to parking space and share certificate is mentioned. The Respondent No.2 has settled the matter with the builder. The Consent Terms filed between the Respondent No.2 and 5-APL-1817-2019.doc N.S.Kamble Builder/Accused Nos.1 to 3 are taken on record and it is marked ‘x’ for identification. From the Consent Terms, it appears that Respondent No.2 has received two parking slots and possession of his flat. There is delay of more than three years to file the complaint. Though there are allegations made against the Applicants under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120(B) of the IPC, but there is no evidence produced on record to make out applicability of these Sections against the Applicants but these facts are not considered by Courts below. 10. In view of above, I pass following order. ORDER (i) The Application is allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 7th November 2019 passed by the learned Sessions Court in Criminal Appeal No.1250 of 2019 is quashed and set aside. (iii) The issue process order passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Bandra, Mumbai in CC No.174/SW/2016 against the Applicants is quashed and set aside. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)