902- Revn 293 of 2026.doc Tikam IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 293 OF 2026 Aparna Ashok Shinde ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 294 OF 2026 Ashok Dnyanoba Tupe ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 295 OF 2026 Vasant Khashaba Chavan ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 299 OF 2026 Ashok Tukaram Shinde ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 298 OF 2026 Shivaji Ramchandra Varude ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 297 OF 2026 Baban Eknath Kate ...Applicant Vs. VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Digitally signed by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date: 2026.09.08 11:17:55 +0530 902- Revn 293 of 2026.doc Tikam The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 296 OF 2026 Pandurang Vitthal Ghadge ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents _______________________________________________________________ Mr. Amogh Singh i/by Shyam Birje, Advocate for Applicants in all matters. Mr. Sameer Mangaonkar, APP for Respondent-State. Mr. Sumedh Modak a/w. Shekar Mane a/w Mr. Rahul Vijaymane a/w. Rutik Kashid , Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 Mr. Veerdhaval Kakade i/by Prabhakar Jadhav, Advocate for Respondent No.3. API V.D. Jadhav, EOW -3 Navi Mumbai. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 28th AUGUST, 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicants, learned APP and learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 and Respondent No.3. 2. The challenge in these applications is to the impugned order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Navi Mumbai dated 02/02/2026 whereby the Learned Judge has permitted the Applicants to operate bank accounts but directed to execute solvent surety equivalent to the alleged amount. 3. It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that 902- Revn 293 of 2026.doc Tikam Applicants' accounts are freezed in connection with the crime. The said bank accounts have no connection with the crime. These bank accounts are private accounts of the Applicants. Applicants have filed undertaking, stating that if required, Applicants will re-deposit the amounts, which are withdrawn from the said bank accounts and requested to allow the Applications. 4. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 has strongly objected to allow the applications on the ground that offence is registered against the Applicants and co-accused for misappropriation of the amount of Shivkrupa Sahakari Pathpedhi Ltd. Learned counsel further submitted that as on 05/09/2024, the total balance in the frozen account was Rs.1,77,60,341.91. It was further submitted that after the accounts were de-frozen pursuant to the order dated 13/09/2024 passed by the Additional Registrar, the Applicant withdrawn Rs.1,43,85,767/- from the said accounts. Hence, requested to reject the applications. He further submitted that the investigation is going on/ in progress. 5. I have heard all learned counsel. The Applicants and Respondents both have challenged the impugned order. Admittedly, the bank accounts frozen by the Investigating Officer are private bank accounts of the Applicants. The Applicants have filed an undertaking stating that the amount withdrawn from the bank accounts shall be re- 902- Revn 293 of 2026.doc Tikam deposited if the Trial Court finds that the said amount is required to be re- deposited. The fraud amount is Rs.6,83,52,917/-. As Applicants have filed an undertaking to re-deposit the amount withdrawn by them, the Applicants cannot be denied to operate their private bank accounts and in view of the undertaking of the Applicants, I pass following order: ORDER (i) Criminal Revision Applications are allowed. (ii) The Applicants are permitted to operate the private bank accounts. (iii) The Applicants shall re-deposit the amount withdrawn by the Applicants in accordance with their undertaking if directed by the Trial Court. (iv) The Applicants are also be directed that if they fail to re- deposit the amount as directed by the Trial Court, their property shall be liable to be attached. (v) The condition requiring solvent surety is hereby quashed and set aside. (vi) Revision Applications are accordingly disposed of. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)