[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Ravindra Yashwant Mehendale vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 15 April, 2026
Author: R.N. Laddha
Bench: R.N. Laddha
2026:BHC-AS:17700
Chitra Sonawane. 36-ABA-27,29,26-2026.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Anticipatory Bail Application No.27 of 2026
Sangita Ravindra Mehendale
Age: 56 years, Occ: None,
Indian Inhabitant,
having address at 26, Yashree,
Nirmal Baug Society,
Shivdarshan, Parvati Pune ... Applicant
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
2. The Sr. Police Inspector,
Deccan Police Station, Pune
3. Prasad Vasudev Pranjpe
2nd Floor, Chandrama Apartments,
Prabhat Road, Deccan, Pune ... Respondents
With
Interim Application (Stamp) No.7764 of 2026
In
Anticipatory Bail Application No.27 of 2026
Prasad Vasudev Pranajpe
Age: 59 years, Occ: Business,
Residing at-2nd Floor,
Chandrama Apartments,
Prabhat Road, Deccan, Pune ... Intervenor/Informant.
In the matter between:
Sangita Ravindra Mehendale
Age: 45 years, Occ: Business,
Page 1 of 8
__________________________________________________
15 April 2026
::: Uploaded on - 15/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2026 20:34:48 :::
Chitra Sonawane. 36-ABA-27,29,26-2026.docx
R/at - Yashree, Nirmal Baug Society,
Sahakar Nagar, Pune ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(Through Deccan Police Station,
vide CR No.177/2025) ... Respondent.
With
Anticipatory Bail Application No.29 of 2026
Saurabh Ravindra Mehendale
Age: 30 years, Occ: None,
Indian Inhabitant,
having address at 26, Yashree,
Nirmal Baug Society,
Shivdarshan, Parvati Pune ... Applicant
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
2. The Sr. Police Inspector,
Deccan Police Station, Pune
3. Prasad Vasudev Pranajpe
2nd Floor, Chandrama Apartments,
Prabhat Road, Deccan, Pune ... Respondents
With
Interim Application (Stamp) No.7765 of 2026
In
Anticipatory Bail Application No.29 of 2026
Page 2 of 8
__________________________________________________
15 April 2026
::: Uploaded on - 15/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2026 20:34:48 :::
Chitra Sonawane. 36-ABA-27,29,26-2026.docx
Prasad Vasudev Pranajpe
Age: 59 years, Occ: Business,
Residing at-2nd Floor,
Chandrama Apartments,
Prabhat Road, Deccan, Pune ... Intervenor/ Informant.
In the matter between:
Saurabh Ravindra Mehendale
Age: 45 years, Occ: Business,
R/at Yashree, Nirmal Baug Society,
Sahakar Nagar Pune ... Applicant
versus
The State of Maharashtra
(Through Deccan Police Station,
vide CR No.177/2025) ... Respondent.
With
Anticipatory Bail Application No.26 of 2026
Ravindra Yashwant Mehendale
Age: 62 years, Occ: None,
Indian Inhabitant,
having address at 26, Yashree,
Nirmal Baug Society,
Shivdarshan, Parvati Pune ... Applicant
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
2. The Sr. Police Inspector,
Deccan Police Station, Pune
Page 3 of 8
__________________________________________________
15 April 2026
::: Uploaded on - 15/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 16/04/2026 20:34:48 :::
Chitra Sonawane. 36-ABA-27,29,26-2026.docx
3. Prasad Vasudev Pranajpe
2nd Floor, Chandrama Apartments,
Prabhat Road, Deccan, Pune. ... Respondents
With
Interim Application (Stamp) No.7749 of 2026
In
Anticipatory Bail Application No.26 of 2026
Prasad Vasudev Pranajpe
Age: 59 years, Occ: Business,
Residing at-2nd Floor,
Chandrama Apartments,
Prabhat Road, Deccan, Pune ... Intervenor/Informant.
In the matter between:
Ravindra Yashwant Mehendale
Age: 45 years, Occ: Business,
R/at- Yashree, Nirmal Baug Society,
Sahakar Nagar, Pune ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(Through Deccan Police Station,
vide CR No.177 of 2025) ... Respondents
----
Mr Shivraj Kuncharge, a/w. Mr Parmeshwar Bhise, for the
applicants in all ABAs.
Mr Nagesh Khedkar, for the intervenor in all IAs.
Ms Anagha A Deshmukh, APP, for the respondent/ State.
PSI AB Patil, Deccan Police Station, Pune City, is present.
----
Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 15 April 2026.
__________________________________________________
15 April 2026
Chitra Sonawane. 36-ABA-27,29,26-2026.docx
P.C.:
Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. For the reasons stated in the interim applications, and no
objection from the other side, the interim applications are
allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a). The applicants in
anticipatory bail applications to implead the intervenor in
respective applications as a party respondent to these
applications. Necessary amendment shall be carried out
forthwith.
3. The interim applications stand disposed of accordingly.
ABA Nos.27 of 2026 a/w 29 of 2026 and 26 of 2026 :
By these applications, the applicants seek pre-arrest bail in
connection with CR No.177 of 2025, registered at Deccan
Police Station, Pune, for offence punishable under Sections
318(4), 316(2) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
2. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the
applicants, the learned Counsel for the intervenor/respondent
No.2, and the learned APP representing respondent/State.
3. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that the informant came
in contact with the applicant Ravindra Mehandale in the year
__________________________________________________
15 April 2026
Chitra Sonawane. 36-ABA-27,29,26-2026.docx
2021. Applicant Ravindra is the husband of applicant Sangita
and the father of applicant Saurabh. The applicants represented
that they were capable of arranging substantial loans through
certain entities and persons, and on such representation,
induced the informant and others to part with a sum of
Rs.57,66,200/- towards margin money for procuring a loan of
Rs.10 Crore. Despite receipt of the said amount, the applicants
failed to secure the loan. It is further alleged that upon demand,
the applicants issued cheques amounting to Rs.1,25,00,000/-,
which, on presentation, were dishonoured.
4. Learned Counsel for the applicants submitted that the
applicants are falsely implicated; that there is a delay in lodging
the FIR; and that the dispute is essentially civil in nature,
arising out of a financial transaction, for which appropriate
civil remedies are available. It is contended that the essential
ingredients of the alleged offences are not made out.
5. Learned APP opposed the application, submitting that the
applicants induced the informant and others to part with a
substantial amount under the pretext of securing a loan and
failed to fulfil their assurances. It is further submitted that
similar complaints have been lodged against the applicants,
indicating a pattern of conduct. The investigation is at a nascent
stage, and custodial interrogation is necessary for the recovery
__________________________________________________
15 April 2026
Chitra Sonawane. 36-ABA-27,29,26-2026.docx
of the amount and for unearthing the full extent of the offence.
6. Upon consideration of the material on record, this Court
finds that prima facie, the allegations disclose that the
applicants, by making representations and assurances of
securing a loan, induced the informant to part with a
substantial amount of Rs.57,66,200/-. The subsequent conduct
of issuing cheques which were dishonoured lends support to
the prosecution's case at this stage. The sequence of events, as
alleged, cannot be said to be a mere breach of contract or civil
dispute. The element of inducement and dishonest intention,
prima facie, appears to be present from the inception. The
contention regarding the delay in lodging the FIR, at this stage,
does not dilute the gravity of the allegations, particularly when
the transactions appear to be continuous and assurances were
allegedly given from time to time.
7. The material placed on record further indicates that
similar complaints have been made against the applicants. The
possibility of multiple victims and a larger conspiracy cannot be
ruled out at this stage. The investigation is admittedly at a
nascent stage, and an effective investigation would require
custodial interrogation of the applicants, inter alia, for recovery
of the amount and for ascertaining the involvement of other
persons. Grant of anticipatory bail, in the facts of the present
__________________________________________________
15 April 2026
Chitra Sonawane. 36-ABA-27,29,26-2026.docx
case, is likely to impede the course of investigation. In cases of
this nature, the custodial interrogation becomes essential to
unearth the fraud in all its facets and have the money trail.
Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the
amount involved, and the prima facie material indicating
dishonest intention, this Court is not inclined to exercise its
discretion in favour of the applicants.
8. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail applications
stand rejected.
[R.N. Laddha, J.]
__________________________________________________
15 April 2026
