B.A. No. 78/2024.
MHCC020006512024
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE MUMBAI,
AT GR. BOMBAY.
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 78 OF 2024.
IN
C.R.NO. 1 OF 2022.
Ajaykumar Sitaram Nishad
… Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of DCB CID Unit -VII,
Vide C. R. No. 01 of 2022.)

… Respondent
Appearances :Ld. Adv. Ms. Sana S for the applicant/ accused.
Ld. A.P.P. Mr. Abhijeet Gondwal for the State present.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R.NO.37)
DATED : 15th JANUARY, 2024.
ORDER
By this application the applicant/accused Ajaykumar
Sitaram Nishad seeks to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, (In short, “Cr.P.C”), as they being accused
in C.R.No.01/2022 registered with DCB CID Unit-VII, Mumbai,
Page 1 of 6
B.A. No. 78/2024.
(C.R.No.9/2022 registered with Bhandup Police Station) for the
offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120(B)
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (In short “IPC”). This is a third bail
application post filing of charge-sheet.

THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE APPLICANT’S CASE ENSUES AS UNDER,
2.

It is stated that, initially the offence was registered with
Bhandup Police Station by the complainant against four persons and
thereafter as on 07/01/2022, the investigation was handed over to DCB
CID, Unit-VII of Crime Branch, Mumbai. Thereafter, during the course
of investigation, the respondent agency had seized all the documents
from
the
alleged
four
accused
persons
and
applicant/accused was apprehended and arrested.

accordingly
the
The applicant/
accused categorically stated to the respondent agency that he was
introduced to the co-accused by one Mr. Narayan and that the
applicant/accused doesn’t have any knowledge about the alleged
transaction between the complainant and four accused persons, as
alleged. It is further stated that the applicant/accused had come to
Mumbai in the month of December 2021 for the purpose of his job and
in the meantime, had met one of the accused Mr. Anilkumar
Ishwarsharan Singh, who promised the applicant/accused to secure
such job for him in Mumbai.

The sleuth of the respondent agency
arranged a campaign at the hotel and the applicant/accused along with
the co-accused were put under arrest.
3.

Ld. advocate for applicant/accused states that, the
Applicant/accused is falsely implicated and that the co-accused who
Page 2 of 6
B.A. No. 78/2024.
being attributed with the major role is being enlarged by the Hon’ble
High Court and the observation of the Hon’ble High Court lay the case
of
the
applicant/accused
on
same
footing
and
hence
the
applicant/accused claims for parity. Co-accused in the matter are
enlarged by the Hon’ble High Court and even by this Court, and this
being a substantial change in circumstance post rejection of the
application after filing of charge-sheet.

Lastly the Ld. Advocate for
applicant/accused states that considering the quantum of period of
incarceration, the applicant/accused is entitled to be released on bail.
Hence, the Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused claimed for parity and
prayed for enlargement of the applicant/accused on bail.
4.

Per contra the prosecution has filed their reply vide Exh.2,
and inter alia have resisted the application upon various grounds by
stating similar grounds as stated hereinbefore. It is categorically stated
that, the Applicant accused is a professional cheater. Further, it is stated
that, the applicant/accused has forged his photograph and has prepared
a bogus aadhar card and pan card in another name i.e. Rajvinder Ashok
Mehra and the said aadhar card and pan card were seized at the time of
his arrest. It has also revealed that the Applicant/accused have forged
documents in the name of RBI, Finance Ministry (Union of India), DR
DO, ISRO, raw, and such other Indian administrative offices and
multinational banks. The sleuth has already corresponded with all such
departments and multinational banks and certain such correspondences
from the other side are awaited. Further, the prosecution apprehends
abscondance and tampering of prosecution evidence. Lastly, the Ld.
Prosecutor prayed for rejection of application.

Page 3 of 6
B.A. No. 78/2024.
5.

Heard learned advocate for Applicant/accused, and learned
prosecutor for the state. Perused application and reply.
6.

It is evident that the Applicant/accused had preferred such
application hereinbefore and therefore in order substantiate the
maintainability the applicant/accused has to propel out the substantial
change in circumstances. It is pertinent that Ld. Advocate for applicant
has filed and relied upon the order of the Hon’ble High Court in the bail
application preferred by the co-accused who is attributed with the prime
and major role qua is an accused No. 1. In this regard, the Hon’ble High
Court has palpably observed for the reason that the charge-sheet has
been filed and and the sum held under the crime is already recovered.
The Hon’ble High Court on two different occasion have granted such
relief of enlargement to co-accused persons, who are laid on higher
pedestal. Therefore, upon the aforesaid set of facts, I hold that the
application
deserves
consideration
based
upon
the
change
circumstances, hence, order infra: –
ORDER
1. Bail Application No.78/2024 is allowed.
2. The applicant/accused Ajaykumar Sitaram Nishad
being accused in C.R.No.1/2022 registered with DCB
CID Unit-VII, Mumbai, (C.R.No.9/2022 registered with
Bhandup Police Station) for the offences punishable
under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) and
34 of Indian Penal Code, be released on furnishing P.
R. bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand
Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.
3. The applicant/accused and his sureties shall provide
their respective residential addresses, mobile numbers
and email addresses, if any. The applicant/accused
Page 4 of 6
in
B.A. No. 78/2024.
shall intimate any such change in address or telephone
number and Email ID forthwith.
4. The applicant/accused shall not directly or indirectly
make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the present case to
dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court.
5. The applicant/accused shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence in any manner.
6. The applicant/accused shall attend the DCB CID UnitVII on every Tuesday and Friday between 11.00 a.m.
and 4.00 p.m. until further order.
7. The applicant/accused shall surrender his passport if
any with the investigating officer. If the applicant
doesn’t have passport, he will furnish an affidavit to
that effect.
8. The applicant/accused shall not leave India without
permission of this Court.
9. Any breach of the conditions in this bail order shall
entail cancellation of bail forthwith.
10.Bail Application No.78/2024 stands disposed of
accordingly.

DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
JOGLEKAR
Date : 15.01.2024.

Digitally signed by
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH JOGLEKAR
Date: 2024.01.15
17:36:00 +0530
(Dr. A. A. JOGLEKAR)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (C.R.37)
Dictated on
: 15.01.2024.
Transcribed on : 15.01.2024.
HHJ signed on : 15.01.2024.

Page 5 of 6
B.A. No. 78/2024.

“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
15.01.2024
05.35 p.m.

Mahendrasing D. Patil
(Stenographer Grade-I)
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGMENT/ORDER
HHJ Dr. SHRI A. A. JOGLEKAR
(Court Room No. 37)
of
15.01.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O.
on
15.01.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on
15.01.2024
Page 6 of 6