1 18 ABA 715.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 715/2026 (Shubham Sukhadev Rajguru Vs. The State of Maharashtra) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. V. J. Gawali, Advocate applicant. Ms. H. D. Marathe, APP for non-applicant/State. CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J . DATED : 18/08/2026. Heard. 2. Issue notice to the non-applicant returnable forthwith. The learned APP waives. Since the learned APP has filed the reply after receiving the copy of the present application, the application is decided finally. 3. By this application, the applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 981/2025 registered with Police Station Washim, Dist. Washim for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5), 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4. The first information report is lodged on 18/12/2025, wherein the informant has alleged that her plot was fraudulently sold without her knowledge by using forged documents. The informant submitted that in 2 18 ABA 715.26 November, 2024 she had purchased 150 sq.metres plot situated at Gulathi Layout, Hingoli Naka, Washim from her brother Subham Prakash Bais for Rs. 7,56,000/- and the plot was to be registered in her name. She came to know that plot has been sold by using forged documents and by a woman impersonating her. On verification at the Sub- Registrar Office Washim, informant came to know that accused No.1 Balkrishna Gaikwad had allegedly arranged accused No.2 Shobha Savle to impersonate her and she used forged Aadhar card and other documents with the assistance of the present applicant i.e. accused no.3 and accused no.4 Akshay Amravkar for executing a sale-deed dated 04/08/2025 in his favour. It is submitted that the said plot was successively sold by accused Balkrishna Gaikwad to Anil Chabukswar on 23/09/2025. Thereafter, by Anil to Ganesh Mohale and Laxman Wankhade on 13/10/2025 and subsequently to Tarzen Badhel on 14.11.2025. The applicant along with other co-accused persons created forged documents i.e. Identity Card, fraud Aadhar Card and other documents and impersonated the informant and fraudulently sold her plot without her knowledge and consent and thereby cheated her. Based on 3 18 ABA 715.26 this information, the first information report was registered. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is a case of impersonation. It is alleged in the first information report that a lady named Ashwini More is the original owner of the plot however instead of Ashwini More, some lady was placed who has impersonated Ashwini More. The present applicant has falsely identified the lady who was impersonating as Ashwini More in whose favour the sale-deed was executed. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the main accused are Shobha Savle and Balkrishna Gaikwad. He submits that the applicant was merely a witness who identified the parties. No gainful role has been shown to the present applicant. Whereas, Shobha Savle and Balkrishna Gaikwad have already been granted regular bail, and the investigation is at final stage. Considering the allegations, the custodial interrogation would not be necessary. 6. On the other hand, the learned APP submits that the applicant has committed a serious offence, who stood as a witness and identified a wrong person. She further 4 18 ABA 715.26 submits that the plot was illegally sold. Under such circumstances, the applicant does not deserve to be granted bail. 7. I have considered the rival submissions. It is undisputed that the main accused are Shobha Savle and Balkrishna Gaikwad. Prima facie, it appears that the applicant has stood as a witness to the sale-deed and identified a lady who stood as party to the sale-deed, instead of original owner Ashwini More. The fact remains that the two main accused persons have been granted bail. Therefore, considering the nature of allegations against the applicant, I am inclined to allow the application hence, the following order:- ORDER (I) Application is allowed and disposed of. (II) In the event of arrest, the applicant Shubham Sukhadev Rajguru be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 981/2025 registered with Police Station Washim, Dist. Washim for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5), 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount. (III) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station 5 18 ABA 715.26 on every Sunday between 11.00 a.m. to 02.00 p.m. or as and when called by the Investigating Officer. (IV) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. (V) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency. 8. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. 9. The observations of this Court are prima facie in nature and are only limited to this application. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by the aforesaid observations. ( M. M. NERLIKAR , J.) Gohane Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 19/08/2026 17:28:48