1 17-ABA 2986-25 @ IAST 22718-25.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2986 OF 2025 Gurdeep Singh @ Rinku Singh Rajput … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO.22718 OF 2025 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2986 OF 2025 ----- Mr. Gaurav Sharma for the Applicant. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Omkar Andhale, Vishal Shirsat a/w Digamber Kate i/by K. K. Holambe Patil for the Intervener-first informant. ----- CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 09TH DECEMBER 2025 P.C. : 1. This is an Application for anticipatory bail. 2. The Applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.539 of 2025 registered with Vinoba Bhave Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. It is the case of the prosecution that the first informant was in need of financial assistance for his property development business. Accordingly, he was introduced to the Applicant and other co-accused who offered him a loan of Rs.15 Crores. For the said purpose, the Applicant and other co- Mugdha 1 of 3 MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE Digitally signed by MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE Date: 2025.12.16 15:31:19 +0530 2 17-ABA 2986-25 @ IAST 22718-25.doc accused induced the first informant to pay Rs.45,39,000/- as processing and registration fees. However, no such loan was disbursed and neither the said amount paid by the first informant was refunded to him. The allegations against the present Applicant and other co-accused are of defrauding the first informant to the tune of Rs.45,39,000/-. 4. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has nothing to do with the alleged crime. It is submitted that the allegation of inducement are against the co-accused. It is submitted that the Applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged defrauded amount and no amount was paid to the present Applicant. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation and the Applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation. 5. On the other hand, Learned APP for the Respondent-State and Learned Counsel for the first informant submit that the Applicant was present in the meeting when the first informant was induced by other co- accused to pay the defrauded amount. It is submitted that out of the defrauded amount, the present Applicant has received an amount of Rs.25,30,000/- from the co-accused Yusuf. Learned APP submits that the Applicant is involved in two more crimes of a similar nature. It is submitted that considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the Applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail. 6. I have perused the FIR. The main allegations are against the co- accused Khalid Khan and Yusuf Bawangaonwala. The Applicant, without Mugdha 2 of 3 3 17-ABA 2986-25 @ IAST 22718-25.doc prejudice to his rights and contention, deposited an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in this Court. There appears to be no need of custodial interrogation. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the Applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order:- ORDER i. The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed. ii. In the event of the arrest of the Applicant in Crime No.539 of 2025 registered with Vinoba Bhave Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a PR Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount. iii. The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when called for by the investigating officer and shall co- operate in the investigation. iv. The Applicant shall not commit any other crime. 7. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 8. The Interim Application for intervention shall also stand disposed of. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) Mugdha 3 of 3