6.ABA-2415.25.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2415 OF 2025 Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde & Ors. … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …. Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3320 OF 2025 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2415 OF 2025 Prakash Rameshchandra Jain … Intervenor In the matter between Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde & Ors. … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra …. Respondent ______________________ Mr. Chaitanya Pendse a/w Mr. Vinod Kendre i/by Mr. Yogesh Birajdar, for the Applicants. Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil a/w Mr. Naagesh S. Khedkar, Mr. Gaurish Vaidya and Mr. Rahil Mavale for the Respondent No.2-Intervenor. Mr. B.P. Shirsat, PSI attached to Swargate Police Station, Pune City, Pune present. ______________________ CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 24 AUGUST 2026 Page 1 PPN PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR Digitally signed by PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR Date: 2026.08.27 15:38:44 +0530 6.ABA-2415.25.DOC P. C. :- 1. Heard Mr. Pendse, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants, Ms. Yadav, learned APP appearing for the Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Kuldeep Patil, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2-intervenor. 2. By this application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), the applicants are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.159 of 2025 registered with Swargate Police Station, Pune City, District Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The prosecution case is set out in paragraph 3 of the affidavit dated 9 October 2025 of Mr. Yashwant G. Nikam, Senior Police Inspector, Swargate Police Station, Pune City, District Pune. The said paragraph 3 reads as under:- “3. I say that the prosecution case in brief is as under: (a) The FIR was lodged by the informant namely Prakash R. Jain with Swargate Police Station inter alia stating therein that in the year 2014 the Complainant deceased friend Ramesh Solanki got acquainted with Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, Arvind Avati, Devendra Arvind Avati, Shrikant Anant Nagarkar and Page 2 PPN 6.ABA-2415.25.DOC thereafter they became good friends. They informed Complainant that they are having construction business under the name and style of Spire Associates and Om Developers in the partnership. The Complainant came to know from said four friends that in the year 2016 they have started construction project namely "Citywood" on land bearing Survey No. 55/9, CTS No. 548/C and Final Plot No. 448, at Gultekadi, Pune. The Complainant and his brother Mahavir Jain were residing jointly and due to increase in family members, both have decided to purchase flat. It is the case of the informant that after came to know said fact said Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, Arvind Avati, Devendra Arvind Avati, Shrikant Anant Nagarkar suggested Complainant to purchase flat in the Citywood project and they further stated that they will complete said project with one Jayantilal Tarachand Oswa, partner of M/s. Spire Associates and they informed price of flat of Rs. 1 Crore 80 Lakhs. Thereafter the Complainant talked with his brother Mahavir and he gave consent to purchase 2 flats in the said project. (b) It is the case of the informant that thereafter after negotiations, Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, Arvind Avati, Devendra Arvind Avati, Shrikant Anant Nagarkar asked Complainant and his brother to pay Rs. 25 Lakhs and Rs. 1 Crore 55 Lakhs in cash for one flat. It is the case of the informant that accordingly, the Complainant has paid Rs. 25,00,000/- vide two cheques from his bank account in the name of Om Developers in which Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, Arvind Avati, Devendra Arvind Avati, Shrikant Anant Nagarkar are the partners. Remaining balance amount of Rs. 1 Crore 55 Lakhs is paid by the Complainant in cash to all of them in the year 2016 and 2017 from time to time by taking hand loan from his friend Aniruddha Pradip Patwardhan. It is the case of the informant that thus, the Complainant has paid total amount of Rs. 1 Crore 80 Lakhs to the all partners of Om Developers and Complainant is having acknowledgment of the same. (c) It is the case of the informant that however in spite of receipt of entire consideration of flat, Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, Arvind Avati, Devendra Arvind Avati, Shrikant Anant Nagarkar were not ready to give possession of flat to the Complainant. It is the case of the informant that the informant went on the site but did not find no construction work is started Page 3 PPN 6.ABA-2415.25.DOC on the site and thereafter the Complainant asked Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, Arvind Avati, Devendra Arvind Avati, Shrikant Anant Nagarkar that whey you are going to start construction, when are you going to give possession from time to time but till the year 2018-2019 they are avoiding to give possession of flat by giving various excuses of Notbandi, Maha Rera permissions etc., they also gave reasons change of partners and Corona in the year 2020-2021 and are avoiding to handover possession of flats to the Complainant. It is the case of the informant that thereafter, they avoided by saying reason that one of the partners out of them ie. Mr. Arvind Gajajn Avati expired on 05/10/2021. Thereafter also they did not give possession of flat nor execute any document in respect of said flat in favour of the Complainant. (d) It is the case of the informant that thereafter mediator Mr. Vijay Mantri made intervention in the said matter at that time, all said partners and including complainant's friend Aniruddha Patwardhan, brother Mahavir Jain were present. It is the case of the informant that however after frequent follow ups made by the Complainant with said partners, they executed Memorandum of Understanding dated 29/12/2023 on the Rs. 500/- stamp paper in favour of Complainant and thereby they have agreed that they have sold Flat No. 401 of Pine Building in Citywood Co-op. Hsg. Society to the Complainant and Rs. 1 Crore 80 Lakhs is received towards consideration amount of said flat. Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde and Devendra Arvind Avati have signed on the said MOU and said MOU is duly notarized in the Notary Register of Adv. Trupti Bhimrao Shinde. (e) It is the case of the informant that in the month of July 2024 Devendra Avati called upon the Complainant and his brother and friend Patwardhan at Salisbury Park and told that they will execute Sale Deed and gave possession of flat till 15th August 2024. It is the case of the informant that however Complainant was not having any trust on him and after enquiry Complainant did not receive any proper information and therefore the Complainant took online search in August 2024 and came to know that Flat No. 401 was already sold to Vijay Suresh Mantri and Anita Vijay Mantri vide Agreement dated 24/03/2022 which is duly registered in the Office of Sub Registrar Haveli No. 4, Pune at Sr. No. 5098/2022. It is the case Page 4 PPN 6.ABA-2415.25.DOC of the informant that in spite of that they have executed notarized MOU in favour of Complainant in respect of said flat. (f) It is the case of the informant that thereafter the Complainant asked explanation to Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, Devendra Arvind Avati, Shrikant Anant Nagarkar about the flat or asked to refund his money but they abused the Complainant, his brother Mahavir and friend Aniruddha Patwardhan and threatened to kill them by saying that they have good contacts in senior officers in police department and we will lodge false complaints against you and will send you in the jail. Thus Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, Devendra Arvind Avati, Shrikant Anant Nagarkar have cheated Complainant for amount of Rs. 1 Crore 80 Lakhs by not giving flat in the said project and used said amount for their personal benefit and committed fraud upon the Complainant. (g) On the basis of the complaint lodged by the Orig. Complainant/informant, offence vide CR No. 159/2025 was registered with Swargate Police Station, Pune City, Dist.: Pune for the offences punishable under sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 409, 506, 504, 34 of Indian Penal Code against (1) Atul Ratnakar Mahashabde, (2) Devendra Arvind Awati, (3) Shrikant Anant Nagarkar and (4) Others on 18.06.2025 and investigation was commenced.” 4. The prosecution case that the First Informant has advanced a total amount of Rs.1,80,00,000/- for purchase of a flat in a scheme which is being undertaken by the Applicants is further substantiated by the execution of Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 29 December 2023 by the Applicant Nos.1 and 2 in their capacity as Partners of Spire Associates & OM developers. The said MoU refers to receipt of Rs.1,80,00,000/- from the first informant Prakash Rameshchandra Jain (Mandot)and his brother Page 5 PPN 6.ABA-2415.25.DOC Mahaveer R. Jain (Mandot). The said MoU specifically records that Flat No.401 on fourth floor, in the said scheme known as ‘City Wood Co-operative Society Ltd.’ admeasuring about 3435 sq.ft. salable area including Terrace in Pine building is sold to the first informant and his brother. During investigation, it transpired that the said flat was already sold by the Applicants by registered Sale Deed dated 24 March 2022 in favour of one Mr. Vijay Suresh Mantri. 5. It is the submission of Mr. Pendse that even if entire prosecution case is admitted then also said amount of Rs.1,80,00,000/- is investment in the said scheme and not for the purchase of the flat. The said contention, at this prima facie stage, cannot be believed, in view of execution of the MoU dated 29 December 2023. 6. Perusal of the record shows that the offence is very serious. In fact, learned APP states that after registrations of the offence, there are total five complaints received from various persons making the same allegations that some other flats are sold to these purchasers and the same was again sold to third persons. In the Page 6 PPN 6.ABA-2415.25.DOC facts and circumstances of the present case, no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed. 8. As Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed, nothing survives in the interim application and same is disposed of. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Page 7 PPN