[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Akash @ Shiva S/O Pruthviraj Tiwari vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps ... on 30 March, 2026
1 25 BA 304.26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 304/2026
(Akash @ Shiva S/o Pruthviraj Tiwari Vs. The State of Maharashtra)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Sunil Manohar, Senior Counsel assisted by P.R. Agrawal,
Advocate for applicant.
Mr. A. Mate. APP for non-applicant/State.
CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATED : 30/03/2026.
Heard.
2. By this application, the applicant is seeking bail in
connection with Crime No.233/2025 registered with Police
Station Yavatmal (city), Dist. Yavatmal for the offence
punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(2)(3), 340(2), 61,
238, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution story are that the
First Information Report was lodged by one Pritesh Lucky
Dinesh Jaiswal on 10/02/2025 alleging that one Anup
Mahesh Jaiswal who is the brother-in-law of the informant
was having agricultural property at Mouza Waki (parwa),
Tq. & Dist. Yavatmal, having Gat No.52/1, admeasuring
8.49 HR. On 27/01/2025 his brother-in-law and Rakesh
Dipak Yadav came to be arrested in Crime No.107/2025
2 25 BA 304.26
registered at Police Station Yavatmal City. It is alleged that
accused Nos. I to 5 have conspired together and prepared
forged documents and executed the sale-deed of the
agricultural land belonging to Anup Jaiswal while he was
in Jail, at Sub-registrar Office No.2, Yavatmal in the name
of accused No.1. The conspiracy is hatched and they have
prepared forged sale-deed in order to cheat and cause
wrongful loss to his brother-in-law and pursuant to the
forged sale-deed, the land owned by Anup Jaiswal was
transferred to accused No.1. On the basis of the said
report, police have registered crime against in all accused
persons.
4. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant
submits that the allegations against the present applicant
are that the applicant had trapped Anup Jaiswal in a false
case i.e. Crime No. 107/2025. While he was in Jail, the
property of Anup Jaiswal was sold at the behest of the
present applicant. One Sandeep Jadhav who is also an
accused has impersonated Anup Jaiswal, owner of the land
before the office of the Sub-registrar, due to which the sale
deed got executed. The learned Senior Counsel submitted
that there is no evidence either of hatching conspiracy in
3 25 BA 304.26
Crime No. 107/2025 or in the present case. So far as the
present case is concerned, the offences are registered,
wherein the maximum punishment provided is of seven
years. Apart from confessional statement of Sandeep
Jadhav, who was presented before the Sub-registrar as
Anup Jaiswal, there is nothing in the entire charge-sheet
against the present applicant. Even the aforesaid
confessional statement cannot be considered while
gratning bail as it is inadmissible. Though this Court has
rejected the applicant's application for anticipatory bail,
however, he was on ad-interim bail, even the Hon'ble
Supreme Court had granted him interim relief. However, at
a later point of time, his application for anticipatory bail
was rejected which was upheld by the Supreme Court. He
submits that the applicant is behind bars since
20/11/2025, considering the fact that the entire case
depends upon the documentary evidence, no further
custody would be required of the applicant, as the
investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed, therefore he
be released on bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP strongly
opposes the application and submits that it is the present
4 25 BA 304.26
applicant who has hatched a conspiracy with other
persons. Initially, the applicant has hatched conspiracy by
implicating Anup Jaiswal in a false case i.e. Crime No.
107/2025. The said case was registered under the
provision of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
Act, 1985 as well as the Arms Act. He submits that case
was only registered keeping in mind that if Anup Jaiswal
is sent to Jail, behind his back, the property could be sold.
Accordingly, one Sandeep Jadhav has impersonated Anup
Jaiswal, while he was in jail and the property was sold to
Sachin Raut, another associate of the present applicant. To
substantiate this contention, he relied upon the CDR
reports, which shows calls between Sachin Raut and the
present applicant. He further submits that the applicant is
involved in a large conspiracy and it is not only restricted
to the documentary evidence. The present applicant has
prepared fake Aadhaar and PAN cards in the name of Anup
Jaiswal by annexing the photographs of Sandeep Jadhav.
Therefore, it was submitted that as there is sufficient
evidence against the applicant, he may not be granted
bail.
5 25 BA 304.26
6. I have considered the rival submissions.
Admittedly, it appears that from Crime No. 107/2025
Anup Jaiswal was discharged. However, in the said crime,
Rakesh is being prosecuted along with the present
applicant. It further appears that the original owner of the
said land was Anup Jaiswal. It is the case of the
prosecution that the applicant was intending to sell the
property owned by Anup Jaiswal by hook or cook, hatched
a conspiracy and Anup Jaiswal was implicated in Crime
No. 107/2025. While Anup Jaiswal was in jail, said
property was sold to one Sachin Raut by presenting co-
accused Sandeep Jadhav in place of Anup Jaiswal.
Accordingly, the sale-deed was executed in the name of
Sachin Raut by Sandeep Jadhav. It appears that fake
Aadhaar and PAN cards were prepared in the name of
Anup Jaiswal, wherein the photograph of Sandeep Jadhav
was annexed. It is further to be noted that in this entire
episode except for the statement of Sandeep Jadhav who
has implicated the present applicant by stating that he has
created his fake Aadhaar and PAN cards,there is nothing
on record. Even that statement is inadmissible. Apart from
that, there is no concrete evidence in the entire charge-
6 25 BA 304.26
sheet to show that there is nexus between Sachin Raut who
is the purchaser of the said property and the present
applicant except for some calls between them. Even for
the offences registered against the applicant, maximum
punishment provided is of seven years . The applicant is in
jail since 20/11/2025. Considering the nature of material
collected by the investigating officer and the fact that the
investigation is already over and charge sheet is filed, I am
inclined to grant bail, hence the following order:-
ORDER
(i) Criminal application is allowed and disposed of.
(ii) The applicant/accused Akash @ Shiva S/o Pruthviraj
Tiwari be released on regular bail in connection with Crime
No.233/2025 registered with Police Station Yavatmal
(city), Dist. Yavatmal for the offence punishable under
Sections 318(4), 336(2)(3), 340(2), 61, 238, 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on his furnishing P.R. Bond
of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount.
(iii) The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted
with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the
evidence.
7 25 BA 304.26
(iv) The accused shall provide his residential address and
cell number to concerned Police Station and shall not
change his place of residence without prior intimation to
the concerned Investigating Officer.
(v) The applicant/accused shall attend each and every
date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial for two
consecutive dates or fails to comply with the aforesaid
conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for
cancellation of bail.
( M. M. NERLIKAR, J.)
Gohane
Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 30/03/2026 19:25:54
