BA-1242-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1242 OF 2026 Arvind Pandurang Bawake … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent ….. Mr. V. D. Sapkal, Senior Counsel i/b Mr. S. B. Gorde, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. S. D. Ghayal, APP for Respondent-State. ..... CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. Reserved on : 30.07.2026 Pronounced on : 31.07.2026 ORDER :- 1. Applicant seeks grant of regular bail on account of his arrest in Crime No.213 of 2026 registered at Shirdi Police Station, District Ahilyanagar for offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(2), 318(4) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and under Sections 39, 44 of the Maharashtra Money Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014. 2. Regular bail is urged on the ground that, applicant is falsely involved and arrested on 31.03.2026. That, he merely happened to be special power of attorney for executing a transaction of land. The 2026:BHC-AUG:32271 BA-1242-2026 -2- power of attorney was only confined to said sole transaction and for no other purpose. That, he had no authority to transfer land or sell it to any person. Learned senior counsel pointed out that, vide above crime, allegations are levelled for commission of offence under Sections 39 and 44 of the Maharashtra Money Lending (Regulation) Act, but applicant is admittedly not involved in any such business. As regards to provisions of Sections 316(2), 318(2) and 318(4) are concerned, it is submitted that the same are for cheating and committing breach of trust, but applicant was never handed over custody or domain over any property, nor he transferred it in any such capacity so as to attract the rigors of above provisions. He pointed out that, provisions of Money Lending Act are not at all gravitated against him. That, there is no wrongful gain or wrongful loss at his instance to any person including informant. 3. Learned senior counsel submitted that, there are allegations of transfer of Rupees Five Crore Fifty Two Lakh, but that transfer was also through RTGS. Learned senior counsel took this Court through the registered power of attorney by which applicant was authorized to carry out transaction. He also pointed out that there is violation and breach of Section 35 of BNSS for not issuing prior notice as required by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central BA-1242-2026 -3- Bureau of Investigation and another 2026 SCC OnLine SC 162. That, he is not a beneficiary in any manner. There is no recovery or discovery to be made at his instance. The documents by which he was empowered are already seized and are part of investigation papers. Investigation is complete as chargesheet is already filed on 27.05.2026 and therefore, as further custody is unwarranted, learned senior counsel urges for grant of bail. 4. Learned APP opposed on the ground that, applicant is named in the FIR. That, he has acted in the capacity of special power of attorney for carrying out the transaction. There are also allegations of cheating, criminal breach of trust to the informant. That, as applicant has played major role along with other accused, learned APP has sought rejection of the bail application. 5. Perused the FIR at the instance of Raosaheb Gondkar. Allegations against present applicant in the FIR are that, present applicant, in the capacity of special power of attorney on behalf of accused nos. 1 and 4 i.e. Captain Kharat and his wife, executed the sale deed dated 22.08.2023 of the land of informant in favour of accused nos. 1 and 4 in lieu of the loan borrowed by the informant. According to the informant, it was agreed between the parties that, BA-1242-2026 -4- informant would repay the loan within one year, after which, it was agreed to return the land to the informant. However, later on, in spite of repayment of said loan amount, accused persons refused to return the land. 6. Thus, from above substance of the FIR, it is emerging that, only role that could be attributed to the present applicant is that, he has acted as a mere special power of attorney for the solitary transaction of sale of land owned by informant and allegedly purchased by accused nos. 1 and 4. Beyond this transaction, applicant does not seem to have played any role. Thus, only allegations as against present applicant are that he acted as special power of attorney. There are no allegations that he is also beneficiary in any manner in the alleged transaction between informant and accused nos.1 and 4. One of the accused, who is wife of accused no.1, is already said to be granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by order dated 28.07.2026. 7. Therefore, as there is no further recovery or discovery to be made at his instance and considering the above limited role attributed to the applicant, when investigation is over and alleged documents of transaction already being laid hands on by the investigating BA-1242-2026 -5- machinery, as no purpose would be served by further detention, and there to be no immediate prospects of charge being framed or trial commencing, relief as prayed deserved to be granted. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER I. The application is allowed. II. Applicant Arvind Pandurang Bawake be released on bail in connection with Crime No.213 of 2026 registered at Shirdi Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, on executing Personal Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, on the following conditions : [a] The applicant shall not tamper prosecution evidence. [b] The applicant shall not leave the area of jurisdiction of the concerned police station till conclusion of trial. [c] The applicant shall regularly attend each and every effective date before the trial court. III. The Bail Application is accordingly disposed off. [ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.] vre