908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 339 OF 2026 WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 336 OF 2026 Ramesh Ramchandra Kalyankar & Ors. … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. …. Respondents ______________________ Mr. Amogh Karandikar, for the Applicants. Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Manoj P. Inamdar, for the Respondent Nos.2 & 3. Mr. Sagar Nikam, PI attached to Taloja Police Station, Navi Mumbai present. Mr. Ramesh Ramchandra Kalyankar, Applicant No.1, Rasiiek Kalyankar, Applicant No.2 and Mrs. Rachana Ramesh Kalyankar, Applicant No.3 are present. ______________________ CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 10 SEPTEMBER 2026 P. C. :- ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 339 OF 2026 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants and the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents. 2. At the outset, the learned counsel appearing for the Applicants and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 Page 1 PPN PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR Digitally signed by PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR Date: 2026.09.11 10:35:09 +0530 908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC state that the dispute which is the subject matter of C.R. No.433 of 2025 registered with Taloja Police Station, Navi Mumbai for the offences punishable under Section 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is settled between the parties and parties have decided to file writ petition seeking quashing of the complaint. 3. Both the learned counsel state that Mr. Sohil Intikhab Alam Hawaldar whose name is referred in the F.I.R. be impleaded as party to this application as Respondent No.3. 4. Accordingly, leave as aforesaid is granted. Amendment be carried out forthwith. Re-verification is dispensed with. 5. The prosecution case is set out in paragraph 2 of the order dated 21 January 2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel in Criminal Bail Application No.745 of 2025. The said paragraph 2 of the order dated 21 January 2026 reads as under :- 2. In short the prosecution case is that, Smt.Rohini Ramesh Kalyankar, the wife of present applicant No.1 and mother of applicant Nos.2 and 3 was the owner of Gut No.117/1, and 117/2/7 out of plot No.7, ad-measuring 174 sq.mtrs comprised in sector No.16, Taloja Phase II. The applicant No.1 is the power of attorney holder of Smt. Rohini Kalyankar. On 02/11/2004 he sold aforesaid plot to one Vilas Kashinath Patil vide sale deed No.7764/2004. Said Vilas Patil mortgaged the above mentioned Page 2 PPN 908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC property with Central Bank of India, Chembur branch and availed loan. The said loan amount was transferred to the account of present applicant No.1. The applicants were well aware that the above mentioned property was mortgaged with Central Bank of India, however, they hand in gloves sold said property to Sohel Imtikhab Alam Hawaldar, the son of sister-in-law of informant Mehmood Makbool Husain on 12/04/2025 by executing sale deed No.2830/2024 at Sub-Registrar’s office, Class–II Panvel-1 for the consideration of Rs.1,50,00,000/-. Thus applicants despite knowing that the said property was mortgaged with Central Bank of India sold it to Sohel Imtikhab Alam Hawaldar and thereby deceived him. The informant thereafter approached Taloja police station and lodged detailed report against applicants. On the basis of report so lodged by informant an offence came to be registered against applicants vide C.R.No. 433/2025 at Taloja police station under above mentioned sections. 6. Thus, the main allegations against the present applicants is that despite knowledge that the, subject property has been mortgaged in the Central Bank of India, same is sold to Sohil Intikhab Alam Hawaldar and the First Informant is the constituted attorney of the said Sohil. Now the parties have arrived at the consent terms and has stated that they will be filing the proceedings seeking quashing of the F.I.R. The said consent terms are signed by the Applicants and Respondent No.2 and newly added Respondent No.3. Accordingly, the said consent terms are taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification. Page 3 PPN 908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC 7. As parties have decided to settle the dispute and have decided to file the proceedings seeking quashing of F.I.R. and as the dispute is also of civil in nature, case is made out for grant of Anticipatory Bail. In view thereof, the following order is passed: O R D E R (a) In the event of arrest of the Applicants in connection with C.R. No.433 of 2025 registered with the Taloja Police Station, Navi Mumbai, the Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one or two solvent sureties each in the like amount. (b) The Applicants shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when called. (c) The Applicants shall furnish their cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto. (d) The Applicants 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 Page 4 PPN 908.ABA-339.26 & ANR.DOC such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel. (e) The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner. 8. The observations made in this order is only for the purpose for considering the anticipatory bail application. 9. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 336 OF 2026 10. Stand over to 5 October 2026. 11. Ad-interim protection already granted shall remain in operation till next date. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] Page 5 PPN