Nanda Sushil Kadam vs State Of Maharashtra

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 5128 Bom
Judgement Date : 15 May, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Nanda Sushil Kadam vs State Of Maharashtra on 15 May, 2026

                                                                           35. ABA 1316-2026.odt



                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1316 OF 2026

Sou. Nanda Sushil Kadam                                )..   Applicant
        Versus
The State of Maharashtra                               )
Through Chatursusngi Police Station                    )..   Respondent

                                   -----
Mr. Aniket Nikam a/w Mr. Samsher Garud, Mr. Joy Pereira, Mr. Atharva
Gade i/b Jayakar & Partners for the Applicant.

Mr. Mayur Sonavane, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State.

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi                     a/w    Mr.      Malhar       Kadam           for      the
Complainant/Intervenor.
                                               -----

                                        CORAM : SANDESH D. PATIL, J.
                                        DATE    : 15th MAY 2026

                                                       (VACATION COURT)


P.C. :

1)        Heard Mr. Aniket Nikam, the learned Counsel appearing for the

Applicant.



2)        Mr. Saryavrat Joshi, the learned Counsel for the complaint prays

to intervene in the matter. The learned Counsel for the Applicant is directed to add the original complainant as party Respondent No.2 to RaJesh Chittewan, PS 1/6 ::: Uploaded on - 19/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 00:25:33 :::

35. ABA 1316-2026.odt the present proceedings.

3) The case of the complainant is that the complainant and one Mr. Sushil Kadam (the husband of the Applicant) were acquainted with each other. In the year 2017, the husband of the Applicant convinced the complainant to purchase the land admeasuring 12 acres owned by one Mr. Balkishan Gupta. It is the case of the complainant that the amount was to be invested in the ratio of 50 per cent by the complainant and 50 per cent by the husband of the Applicant. The complainant further states that the complainant had paid the amount of Rs.50 lakhs to Balkishan Gupta and Rs.25 lakhs to Aristone Multicare Pvt. Ltd. He states that the accounts of Balkishan Gupta and Aristone Multicare Pvt. Ltd were infact shell accounts of non-existing entities. It is the case of the complainant that he had paid an amount of Rs.30 lakhs to the agents and further an amount of Rs.7.50 lakhs as stamp duty. All these transpired in the year 2017. The complainant states that the complainant had gone to register the documents, at that time the complainant was also carrying out cash of Rs.1 crore 35 lakhs. It is the case of the complainant that Balkishan Gupta did not turn up and hence the husband of the Applicant skillfully convinced the RaJesh Chittewan, PS 2/6 ::: Uploaded on - 19/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 00:25:33 :::

35. ABA 1316-2026.odt complainant to keep the cash of Rs.1 crore 35 lakhs with himself, i.e. the husband of the Applicant. The complainant's case is that the Applicant along with her son and her husband duped the complainant to the huge amounts as aforestated, hence, C.R. No.161 of 2026, under Sections 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 339, 316(2), 318(4), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, came to be filed with Chatursungi Police Station.

4) Mr. Aniket Nikam, the learned Counsel for the Applicant states that the entire transaction in question took place in the year 2017. He states that it is very difficult to believe that a person who is duped to the tune of Rs.2 crores and odd amounts will keep quite till the year 2026. He states that assuming for argument without admitting that the complainant was under the fear that the husband of the Applicant is the Police Office of high rank, yet the husband of the Applicant had retired in the year 2018. He submits that it is difficult to believe that that the complainant would keep quite for such a long period. He states that there is a huge inordinate and unexplained delay in filing the F.I.R. He assuming for the argument purpose, states that the transaction in question has taken place, yet the said is purely a monetary dispute of RaJesh Chittewan, PS 3/6 ::: Uploaded on - 19/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 00:25:33 :::

35. ABA 1316-2026.odt civil nature. He states that the custodial interrogation is not necessary.

5) Mr. Satyavrat Joshi, the learned Counsel appearing for the complainant state that the Applicant, in connivance of the husband of the Applicant was instrumental in cheating the present complainant and also causing huge monetary loss to him. He states that the custodial interrogation is required in order to ascertain the trail of money. He states that the offence is very serious in nature, and therefore, their custodial interrogation is necessary. Mr. Joshi, the learned Counsel also states that he would like to file a detailed Affidavit setting forth his case.

6) Mr. Mayur Sonavane, the learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1- State, states that the Investigating Officer is not present and he requires some time to take instructions.

7) In the premise, time is granted to the learned A.P.P. as well as the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2 to file their detailed Affidavit.

RaJesh Chittewan, PS 4/6 ::: Uploaded on - 19/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 00:25:33 :::

35. ABA 1316-2026.odt

8) Taking into consideration a huge delay, prima facie I find that the interim protection requires to be granted to the Applicant.

9) The Applicant being a lady and taking into consideration the huge delay, I am inclined to pass the following Order. Needless to state that the present Order will be limited only to the facts of the present Anticipatory Bail Application.

10)       Hence, the following Order :-



(i)             In the event of arrest, the Applicant-Nanda Sushil

Kadam, shall be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.161 of 2026, registered with Chatursungi Police Station, for offences punishable under Sections 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 339, 316(2), 318(4), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, on furnishing P.R.. bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer RaJesh Chittewan, PS 5/6 ::: Uploaded on - 19/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 00:25:33 :::

35. ABA 1316-2026.odt of the concerned Police Station for a period from 25 th May 2026 to 27th May 2026, between 10.00 a.m. to 01.00 p.m. and thereafter, as and when required.

11)       Stand over to 24th June 2026.




                                                  (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)




RaJesh Chittewan, PS                                                                 6/6
            Digitally signed
RAJESH      by RAJESH
            VASANT
VASANT      CHITTEWAN
CHITTEWAN   Date: 2026.05.19
            10:42:46 +0530
         ::: Uploaded on - 19/05/2026                  ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 00:25:33 :::