Bombay High Court
Aniket Sushil Kadam vs State Of Maharashtra on 21 May, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1315 OF 2026
Aniket Sushil Kadam .. Applicant
Vs.
State of Maharashtra,
Through Chaturshrungi Police Station, Pune .. Respondent
Mr. Aniket Nikam with Mr. S.R. Garud, Advocates, i/by Jayakar &
Partners, for the Applicant.
Mr. Mayur Sonavane, Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent-
State of Maharashtra.
PSI Manisha Jadhav, Chaturshrungi Police Station, Pune City is present
in Court.
CORAM : GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 21ST MAY 2026
[ VACATION COURT ]
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr. Nikam, learned counsel appearing for the Applicant.
2. Mr. Joshi, learned counsel for the complainant prays to intervene in the matter. Mr. Nikam, learned counsel for the Applicant is directed to add the original complainant as party Respondent no.2 to the present proceedings.
3. The case of the complainant is that the complainant and one Mr. Sushil Kadam (the father of the Applicant) were acquainted with each other. In the year 2017, the father of the Applicant convinced the 1/6 7-ABA-1315-2026.doc Dixit ::: Uploaded on - 22/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 01:22:45 ::: 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% by the complainant and 50% by the father 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 this 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.1.35 crores. It is the case of the complainant that Balkishan Gupta did not turn up and hence the father of the Applicant skillfully convinced the complainant to keep the cash of Rs.1.35 crores with himself, i.e. the father of the Applicant. The complainant's case is that the Applicant along with his mother and father 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. 2/6
7-ABA-1315-2026.doc Dixit ::: Uploaded on - 22/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 01:22:45 :::
4. Mr. Nikam, 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 quiet till the year 2026. He states that assuming for argument without admitting that the complainant was under
the fear that the father of the Applicant is a Police Office of high rank, yet the father of the Applicant had retired in the year 2018. He submits that it is difficult to believe that the complainant would keep quiet for such a long period. For the argument's sake even if the transaction in question has taken place, yet the said is purely a monetary dispute of civil nature. He states that the custodial interrogation is not necessary.
5. Mr. Pawar, learned counsel appearing for the complainant states that the Applicant, in connivance of the father 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. He states that, Applicant has received a sum of Rs.25 lakhs from Aristone Multicare Pvt. Ltd. Therefore parity is not applicable. Though transaction is of 2017, the cheque was issued to the 3/6 7-ABA-1315-2026.doc Dixit ::: Uploaded on - 22/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 01:22:45 ::: informant in 2024 and thereafter the FIR came to be registered, therefore delay cannot be contended Mr. Pawar, learned counsel also states that he would like to file a detailed Affidavit setting forth his case.
6. Mr. Mayur Sonavane, the learned APP for the Respondent no.1- State, on instructions, submits that the present Applicant has received a sum of Rs.5 lakhs in his account and the same is required to be recovered.
7. In the premise, time is granted to the learned APP as well as the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent no.2 to file their detailed Affidavit.
8. The Applicant being a student and taking into consideration the huge delay, prima facie I find that the interim protection requires to be granted to the Applicant and 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.
9. Hence, the following order :-
(i) In the event of arrest, the Applicant - Aniket Sushil Kadam, shall be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.161 of 2026, registered with Chatursungi 4/6 7-ABA-1315-2026.doc Dixit ::: Uploaded on - 22/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 01:22:45 ::: 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 of the concerned Police Station for a period from 25th May 2026 to 27th May 2026, between 10.00 a.m. to 01.00 p.m. and thereafter, as and when required.
(iii) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person/s acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade such person/s from disclosing the facts to the Court or any police officer.
(iv) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner.
(v) The Applicant shall provide the Investigating Officer with his residential address along with proof, his contact number, e-mail and must inform the 5/6 7-ABA-1315-2026.doc Dixit ::: Uploaded on - 22/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 01:22:45 ::: Investigating Officer of any changes to this information from time to time.
(vi) The Applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer in the process of investigation of the present crime.
10. Stand over to 24th June 2026.
[GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.] Digitally signed by SNEHA SNEHA ABHAY 6/6 ABHAY DIXIT DIXIT Date:
2026.05.22 7-ABA-1315-2026.doc Dixit 22:34:06 +0530 ::: Uploaded on - 22/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 23/05/2026 01:22:45 :::