907-ABA-375-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.375 OF 2026 Dattatray Bala Walunj …Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …Respondents Ms. Shital Tanpure, for the Applicant. Mr. S. S. Ghag, APP, for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Sachin Hande, for Respondent No.2. PSI S. N. Patil, Alephata Police Station, Pune Rural, present. CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED: 22 SEPTEMBER 2026 PC:- 1. Heard Ms. Tanpure, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant, Mr. Ghag, learned APP, for Respondent No.1-State of Maharashtra and Mr. Hande, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.2. 2. By this Anticipatory Bail Application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.78 of 2025 registered with Alephata Police Station, Pune Rural, for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 308(3), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Page 1 Arjun ARJUN VITTHAL KUDHEKAR Digitally signed by ARJUN VITTHAL KUDHEKAR Date: 2026.09.23 20:38:54 +0530 907-ABA-375-2026.DOC 3. The prosecution case is set out in Paragraph No.2 of the Order dated 16th April 2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Junnar, Tal. Junnar, Dist. Pune in Criminal Bail Application No.55 of 2025, which reads as under: “2- The FIR was lodged on 4/4/2025 by Asmita Akshay Deokar, originally residing at Laxminagar, Alephata, Tal. Junnar, Dist. Pune, alleging that her father-in-law Vitthal Tukaram Deokar was the owner of the property bearing Gat No. 361/1, situated at Mauje Alephata, Tal. Junnar, Dist. Pune, admeasuring about 37 R. After his death, the property devolved upon his son Akshay Vitthal Deokar, who was the husband of the informant. The rest of the legal representatives executed a relinquishment deed in favor of Akshay Deokar, making him the exclusive owner of the property. In the year 2020, he took a loan of Rs. 35,00,000/- from Gomata Sahakari Patsanstha by mortgaging the said property. At the same time, one of his friends, Saurabh Doke's wife Roshani Doke, also took a loan of Rs. 35,00,000/- on the same property. Thus, the property was mortgaged for Rs. 70,00,000/-. After taking the loan, both borrowers failed to pay the installments and repeatedly committed default. The total outstanding amount was Rs. 1,24,00,000/-. The husband of the informant died on 27/5/2023. After his death, the Patsanstha followed up with the informant for repayment of the loan and decided to auction the property for recovery of the amount. The informant decided to sell the land, but no one came forward to purchase it. She then called her father, and both of them approached the Chairman of the Patsanstha. On his advice, they paid Rs. 32,00,000/- to halt the auction on 31/3/2024, and the auction was stopped. The informant and her father were in the process of selling the mortgaged property to settle the outstanding loan amount. However, the informant's mother-in-law, Aruna Deokar, objected to the sale, Page 2 Arjun 907-ABA-375-2026.DOC insisting that her name be mutated in the 7/12 extract before any sale could take place. The informant further alleged that it was the applicant who had influenced her mother-in-law to raise the objections. The informant and her father requested the applicant not to create obstacles in the sale of the property. However, he did not listen and called the informant's father to his office, where he demanded Rs. 3,00,000/- from him. The applicant also threatened that unless he receives the amount, he would not allow the sale of the property. He further threatened them, saying, तुमच्या मुलीच्या जमिमनीचा व्यवहार हा मला सांमितल्यामिवाय करायचा नाही, नाहीतर ाठ माझ्‌याी आहे. The informant then paid Rs. 3,00,000/-in cash to the applicant. Thereafter, the applicant sold the property to one Baban Dagadu Gunjal, resident of Belhe, Tal. Junnar, Dist. Pune, for Rs. 1,22,00,000/-. The informant then repaid the outstanding amount to Gomata Patsanstha. At the time of handing over possession of the property, the applicant raised another objection, demanded more money, and threatened them with dire consequences. With no other option, the informant lodged a report against the accused for both of these incidents.” 4. Ms. Tanpure, learned Counsel for the Applicant, submits that the allegation is that an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- in cash was paid to the Applicant by the First Informant. She submits that although the said contention is incorrect to show the bonafides, the Applicant has deposited an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- before the learned Sessions Court. She submits that a false FIR was lodged against the Applicant. She further submits that there are no other antecedents except one criminal case registered in the year 2010, in which the Applicant was acquitted. Page 3 Arjun 907-ABA-375-2026.DOC 5. On the other hand, Mr. Ghag, learned APP, for Respondent No.1-State, submits that the offence is very serious and, therefore, custodial interrogation is necessary. Mr. Hande, learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 also raises the same contention. 6. Perusal of the record shows that the dispute is concerning the immovable property and the allegation is that an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was paid to the Applicant in cash. The said amount has been deposited before the learned Sessions Court by the Applicant to show his bonafides. 7. There are no other criminal antecedents except, the antecedent of the year 2010, in which the Applicant was acquitted. 8. Ms. Tanpure, learned Counsel for the Applicant, submits that the Applicant will cooperate with the investigation. 9. Mr. Hande, learned Counsel, submits that if this Court is inclined to release the Applicant on anticipatory bail, then stringent conditions be imposed. 10. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances, case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail by imposing conditions. Page 4 Arjun 907-ABA-375-2026.DOC 11. In view thereof, the following Order is passed: O R D E R (a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant - Dattatray Bala Walunj in connection with CR No.78 of 2025 registered with Alephata Police Station, Pune Rural, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount. (b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station, twice in a month i.e. on the first and third Monday of every month, between 11:00 am and 02:00 pm, till conclusion of the trial. (c) The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto. (d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or Page 5 Arjun 907-ABA-375-2026.DOC to any Police personnel. (e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner. (f) The Applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court. 12. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Page 6 Arjun