ba-42-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.42 OF 2026 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.98 OF 2026 Rajesh Maruti Padalkar ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent —————— Mr. Ramnik Pawar (Through VC) i/b. Mr. Amit Waykool, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Shishir Hirey, Public Prosecutor a/w. Veera Shinde, Anand Shalgaonkar, APP for respondents-State. Mr. Jayant Bardeskar (Through V.C.) with Adv. Ahilya Nalawade with Adv. Nakul V. Shukla, Advocate for Intervenor. Ms. Suvrana Patki, Dy. S.P. EOW Kolhapur present. —————— Coram : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J., Reserved On : 14th July 2026 Pronounced On : 27th July 2026. P. C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State and the learned counsel appearing for the complainant. 2. The present application is preferred under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in connection with C.R. No.0917 of 2022 registered with Shahupuri Police adn 1 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc Station, District Kolhapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999. 3. The informant lodged complaint on 25/11/2022 stating that he has introduced to different schemes of by Vijay Patil and attended a seminar in May 2019 of the Company run by Lohitsing Dharmsing Subhedar, Other persons, who were introduced as directors of the said Company had also attended the seminar. Different plans were introduced and the benefits which were to be given to the investors were also disclosed in the seminar. On basis of the information provided by Lohitsing Subhedar and others persons, the informant decided to invest the amount in different plans and he invested Rs.25,00,000/ in his own name and also invested different amount in the name of his relatives. The informant had then come to know from others that there are different subsidiary Companies having names A.S. Traders and Developers LLP, A.S. Traders Solutions Limited, Comercio Vibrant LLP, Gainero Ventures LLP, Trexum Ventures LLP, Capitus Ceker Traders and Developers LLP, Tradewings Solutions Ltd., Vaibavlaxmi Finbiz Pvt.Ltd., Algowings Softech Pvt.Ltd., Tradewings Gurukul Foundation, A.S. Token, D.M. Traders. The informant initially received the returns but then the adn 2 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc Company stopped to give the returns as per the assurance. The informant then started inquiry and came to know that there are different persons, who have invested their amount in different plans of the Company. On inquiry the total investment of different persons was found to be Rs.4,89,72,649/ . He also came to know the names of different persons as Directors of A.S. Traders and Developers and subsidiary Companies. The informant accordingly lodged the complaint to police station Shahupuri on 25/11/2022. On basis of the same C.R. No. 917/2022, u/s. 406, 420 r.w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and U/s. 3, 4 of the M.P.I.D. Act came to be registered. During investigation section 409 of Indian Penal Code was added in the crime. The persons named earlier and different other persons who were found as agents or partner of the main Company and subsidiary Companies were added as an accused. The applicant is arrested on 16/09/2023. The chargesheet is also submitted against the applicant and some of the co-accused persons. 4. Initially, the Company honoured its commitments by paying returns. However, it subsequently defaulted in repayment of the principal amounts as well as the promised returns. Upon making enquiries, the first informant learnt that a large number of investors had invested huge amounts in A.S. Traders and Developers and its subsidiary companies. Consequently, the First Information Report came to be lodged. During the adn 3 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc course of investigation, Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code came to be added, the present applicant was arrested and thereafter the charge-sheet as well as supplementary charge-sheets came to be filed. 5. Mr. Ramnik Pawar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, submitted that the present application is filed primarily on the grounds of prolonged incarceration and the deteriorating medical condition of the applicant. He submitted that an earlier bail application was withdrawn on 18th November 2025 with liberty to approach the Sessions Court on medical grounds. It is submitted that the present application is, therefore, maintainable in view of the subsequent developments relating to the applicant's health. The learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2024) 9 SCC 813, and submitted that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It was submitted that the charge-sheet filed in the present case is voluminous, the charges have not yet been framed, and there is no likelihood of the trial concluding in the near future. It was, therefore, contended that the continued incarceration of the applicant would amount to pre-trial detention and, on that ground, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. adn 4 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc 6. The learned counsel further submitted that the applicant was neither a Director nor a partner of A.S. Traders and Developers or any of its subsidiary entities. According to him, the applicant himself had invested his personal funds in the Company and had, in fact, become a victim of the alleged fraud. It was further submitted that the applicant is suffering from serious psychiatric ailments, including Major Depressive Disorder, and is undergoing continuous psychiatric treatment. In these circumstances, it is urged that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant is a Diploma Holder in Mechanical Engineering, aged about 48 years, having a family comprising his wife and children, who are dependent upon him. It is submitted that the applicant is also suffering from diabetes and other medical ailments. According to the learned counsel, before his arrest, the applicant had fully cooperated with the investigation by responding to the notice issued under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and had, therefore, never attempted to evade the investigation. 8. It is further submitted that several co-accused, namely Shivaji Dhondiram Shinde, Vinayak Vilas Sutar, Ashwini Gawade, Pratik Madde, Suvarna Sarnaik, Rohit Ghevade and Pratapsingh Shevale have already been granted bail by the competent Courts. The applicant, therefore, adn 5 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc claims parity with the said co-accused. It is also submitted that the applicant has remained in custody for a considerable period and the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. 9. The learned counsel further submitted that the investigating agency has already attached the residential house constructed by the applicant together with one vacant plot standing in his name. According to the prosecution itself, the alleged misappropriation attributable to the applicant is approximately Rs.78 Lakhs, whereas immovable properties of equivalent or higher value have already been secured during the course of investigation. It is, therefore, submitted that nothing further remains to be recovered from the applicant and his continued incarceration would serve no useful purpose. The learned counsel accordingly prayed that the applicant be released on regular bail. 10. Per contra, Mr. Bardeskar, the learned counsel appearing for the complainant opposed the application. He submitted that the plea raised by the applicant regarding his medical condition is wholly misconceived. According to the learned counsel, the photographs and other material collected during the course of investigation prima facie indicate that the applicant was actively conducting seminars and participating in promotional activities organised by A.S. Traders and Developers for attracting prospective investors. It was, therefore, submitted that the adn 6 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc applicant cannot portray himself as a mere victim of the alleged fraud. 11. The learned counsel for the complainant further submitted that the judgments relied upon by the applicant are distinguishable on facts and have no application to the present case. Placing reliance upon the decisions in Manik Madhukar Sarve and Others v. Vitthal Damuji Meher and Others, reported in (2024) 10 SCC 753, Jayant Sanjeeva Shetty v. State of Maharashtra (Bail Application No.4989 of 2024) and Shrikant Gangadhar Rao v. State of Maharashtra (Bail Application No.4049 of 2024, decided on 30th June 2025), it was submitted that prolonged incarceration, by itself, cannot constitute a ground for grant of bail in serious economic offences involving large-scale cheating of innocent investors. He submitted that economic offences have far-reaching consequences on society and, therefore, deserve to be viewed differently while considering an application for bail. It was, therefore, prayed that the application be rejected. 12. Mr. Shishir Hirey, learned Public Prosecutor, also opposed the application. He submitted that the material collected during the course of investigation prima facie indicates that the applicant, along with his wife and son, was functioning as an agent of A.S. Traders and Developers. During the search conducted at the residence of the applicant, several incriminating documents came to be recovered. According to the adn 7 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc prosecution, the investigation further reveals that the applicant had received commission, cash incentives and other benefits, including a motorcycle and a car, in consideration of procuring investments for the Company. 13. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the applicant was associated with Tradewing Solutions Ltd., one of the subsidiary companies of A.S. Traders and Developers, and had actively participated in promoting the investment schemes floated by the Company. It is submitted that the vouchers recovered during the course of investigation prima facie indicate that substantial amounts of cash were received by the applicant in his own name as well as in the names of his family members. According to the prosecution, the investigation further discloses that, on account of the inducement made by the applicant, several investors deposited amounts aggregating to approximately Rs.78 Lakhs with the Company. The applicant is also alleged to have received valuable benefits, including motor vehicles and other monetary incentives, from the proceeds of the alleged crime. 14. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the applicant is receiving appropriate psychiatric treatment while in judicial custody and that the report received from the Superintendent of the Central Prison indicates that all necessary medical treatment is being provided to adn 8 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc him. Therefore, according to the prosecution, the medical condition of the applicant does not constitute a valid ground for grant of bail. It was further submitted that the applicant has criminal antecedents and, if released on bail, there is every likelihood of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the prosecution evidence or indulging in similar offences. Relying upon the decisions in Manik Madhukar Sarve (supra) and Shrikant Gangadhar Rao (supra), the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that economic offences, having a serious impact upon society and the financial system, stand on a different footing while considering an application for bail. It was, therefore, prayed that the application be rejected. 15. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State and the learned counsel appearing for the complainant. I have also carefully perused the charge-sheet, the supplementary charge- sheets, the material collected during the course of investigation and the documents placed on record. 16. Prima facie, the prosecution case reveals that the principal accused, namely Lohitsingh Dharmisingh Subhedar and other Directors and office- bearers of A.S. Traders and Developers, floated various investment schemes assuring attractive monthly returns and other incentives with the adn 9 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc object of inducing members of the public to invest substantial amounts. The prosecution further alleges that the funds so collected were diverted through various subsidiary companies and that a large number of investors suffered substantial financial loss. 17. The prosecution has attributed a specific role to the present applicant. According to the prosecution, the applicant was associated with the activities of the Company and had participated in canvassing the investment schemes. The prosecution has also relied upon the documents, vouchers and other material recovered during the course of investigation to contend that the applicant received commission and other monetary benefits. However there are no documents placed on record to show that the Applicant was Director of AS Traders or any other subsidiary company. These allegations are undoubtedly serious and will have to be examined at the trial. At this stage, however, this Court is not expected to undertake a detailed appreciation of the evidence or record any conclusive finding on the merits of the prosecution case. 18. It is not in dispute that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet as well as supplementary charge-sheets have already been filed. Admittedly, the charges are yet to be framed. The prosecution has cited a large number of witnesses and the charge-sheet is voluminous. Having regard to the nature of the prosecution evidence, the adn 10 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc trial is not likely to conclude within a reasonable period. The applicant has remained in judicial custody for a considerable length of time from 16th September 2023. The applicant has also placed material on record indicating that he has been undergoing psychiatric treatment. Though the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that adequate medical treatment is being provided by the jail authorities, the medical condition of the applicant is also a relevant circumstance which deserves due consideration while considering the prayer for bail. 19. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the completion of investigation, the filing of the charge-sheet and supplementary charge-sheets, the period of incarceration already undergone by the applicant, the stage of the trial and the medical condition of the applicant, I am of the considered view that further detention of the applicant is not warranted at this stage. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2024) 9 SCC 813, has held that, howsoever grave the offence may be, the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the present case, the charge-sheet runs into more than 12,000 pages and supplementary charge-sheets have also been filed. The charges have not yet been framed and, therefore, the trial is not likely to conclude within a adn 11 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc reasonable period. The apprehension expressed by the prosecution that the applicant may influence witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence can be adequately addressed by imposing stringent conditions while enlarging the applicant on bail. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to exercise the discretion under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in favour of the applicant. Hence, the following order: ORDER (I) The Applicant, Rajesh Maruti Padalkar, shall be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No.0917 of 2022 registered with Shahupuri Police Station, District Kolhapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999, on furnishing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties in the like amount, subject to the following conditions: A) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station and report to the Investigating Officer twice in a month, i.e. on the 1st and 15th of every month, commencing from 1st August 2026, between 12.00 noon and 2.00 p.m., till the conclusion of the trial. B) The Applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Shahupuri Police adn 12 of 13 ba-42-2026.doc Station, except for attending the Police Station as directed hereinabove, till the conclusion of the trial. C) The Applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. D) The Applicant shall furnish copies of his Aadhaar Card and PAN Card to the Investigating Officer and shall also furnish his detailed residential address, mobile number and the names, addresses and mobile numbers of two of his near relatives. E) A single violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of the bail granted to the Applicant. F) The Applicant shall deposit his Passport, if any, with the Trial Court and shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Trial Court. 18. The Bail Application is accordingly allowed in the aforesaid terms. The Interim Application, if any, does not survive and is accordingly disposed of. [MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.] adn 13 of 13