47.BA.2558.2025.doc Ajay IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2558 OF 2025 Puroshottam Gajanan Patankar .. Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Kedar J. Patil a/w. Ms. Sakshi S. Kadam and Mr. Tejas Shinde, Advocates for Applicant.  Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent – State.  Ms. Harshada Parbhane, Advocate i/by Mr. Prashant Patil for Intervenor. ......…........... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 17, 2026. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Applicant; Ms. Phad, learned APP for Respondent – State and Ms. Parbhane, learned Advocate for Intervenor. 2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R.No.60 of 2024 registered with Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, District Pune for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 472 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’). 3. On 16.09.2026, after hearing the learned Advocates, this Court passed the following order:- 1 of 6 47.BA.2558.2025.doc “1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr. Nakhwa, learned APP for State and Ms. Parbhane, learned Advocate for Intervenor. 2. Mr. Patil would submit that relative of the Applicant has managed to arrange Rs. 19 to 20 Lakh for deposit. He would submit that once the Applicant is released on bail, he would be in a much better position to wipe out the deposit with regard to the amount he had otherwise received even according to the prosecution. 3. I direct learned Advocate for Applicant to file appropriate affidavit of relative of the Applicant to enable this Court to consider the present Applicant for bail. 4. Stand over to 17th September, 2026 under the caption “Part-Heard”.” 4. Today, I have heard Mr. Patil as well as Ms. Parbhane. Undertaking has been filed by the son of Applicant who is a student which states that 2 Demand Drafts aggregating to Rs20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) are produced and appended to the said undertaking. It is seen from the said undertaking that 2 Demand Drafts of Rs7.32 Lakhs and Rs.12.68 Lakhs are to be deposited in IDBI Bank as well as DBS Bank where the twin loan accounts have been replenished on the basis of the EMIs which have been paid. 5. The Demand Drafts which is made in the name of Nitin Patankar, one of the accused persons is on the basis of instructions received from DBS Bank which is also stated in paragraph No.4. The Affidavit is made by the son of Applicant who is a student and I have no reason to disbelieve the same. The original Demand Drafts have been shown to me in Court and I direct that they be deposited. 2 of 6 47.BA.2558.2025.doc 6. The son and the sister of Mr. Patankar are both present in Court and they undertake to deposit the same as stated in the undertaking. Mr. Patil has also argued on the basis of the amounts stated in the charge-sheet with regard to the amounts received by fake account in the name of Sanas Builders & Developers and would submit that out of the total outlay of Rs.4.33 Crores, the owner’s contribution has been paid by the other co-accused person (brother of the Applicant) of Rs.1.46 Crores and to till date he has been regularly depositing EMIs which add up to Rs.1.85 Crores. 7. He would submit that in that view of the matter, even at the highest according to the charge-sheet, the balance amount payable would be Rs.1.02 Crores out of which Rs.20 Lakhs is deposited today and every endeavour shall be made by the Applicant, once he is released on bail, to wipe off the ledger. He would also place on record the Chartered Accountant’s report prepared by the Chartered Accountant of the Applicant’s which has considered the twin loan accounts with IDBI and DBS Bank. According to the said CA report, the outstanding would be in the region of approximately Rs.59 Lakhs only. 8. I have noted the aforesaid submissions only because pursuant to the previous orders, Applicant has shown his bonafides. The effect of custody, rather custodial interrogation any further would not be required, more specifically so when the First Informant / 3 of 6 47.BA.2558.2025.doc Complainant's 6 flats have already been given to the Informant but the arrears amounts which are required to be paid to the bank are yet outstanding. 9. I am of the opinion that the Applicant who has had a good history of being a Developer or otherwise, would be in a much better position to wipe off the deficit once he is released on bail, rather than he languishing inside jail. The investigation having been completed, in my opinion, no further custodial interrogation is required. Ms. Parbhane’s submissions have been considered by the Court. However, the overall circumstances persuade the Court to release the Applicant on bail. 10. Needless to state that any cooperation with the prosecution shall be rendered by the Applicant once he is released on bail. In that view of the matter, the present application stands allowed. 11. Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and findings, Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) Applicant – Puroshottam Gajanan Patankar is directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with CR. No.60 of 2024; (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on 4 of 6 47.BA.2558.2025.doc furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, once every month, on the first Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. until commencement of trial and thereafter shall attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court; (iv) Applicant shall cooperate with the conduct of the trial and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted. Applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail; (v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court; (vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of his current residential address and mobile telephone number and shall forthwith inform the Investigating Officer of any change in his residential address or 5 of 6 47.BA.2558.2025.doc mobile telephone number, as and when such change occurs; and (viii)Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to the Applicant. 12. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are limited for the purpose of granting bail only and I have not made any observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made hereinabove in this order. 13. Bail Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Ajay 6 of 6 AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Digitally signed by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.09.17 18:10:45 +0530