1
Cri. Bail Application No. 868 of 2022
ORDER BELOW EX. 01 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION
NO. 868 OF 2022
{Madhu Laxman Mahtani vs. The State of Maharashtra through
Upnagar Police Station}
This is an application under section 438 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail in crime no. 181
of 2022 registered with Upnagar Police Station for the offences
punishable under sections 420, 468, 470, 471, 472 read with 34 of
the I. P. C.
02]
The applicant contended that false and fabricated case is
registered against her. She has not committed any offence. She is just
the power of attorney holder of her brother Mahesh Gangvani. She is
not beneficiary to the transaction. She has not dishonest intention to
cheat the complainant. The amount of Rs. 3 lacs in the agreement
was received by Mahesh Gangvani for Himgiri builder. Her role was
not to construct or develop the property. Her custodial interrogation
is not required. She has deep root in the society. Her family is
dependent on her. She is a woman. She is ready to abide by any
conditions imposed by the court. Hence, she has prayed for grant of
anticipatory bail application.
03]
APP filed say at Ex. 07 and I. O. filed say at Ex. 08. They
have stated that the offence is of serious nature. The accused nos. 5
and 6 are released on anticipatory bail. Name of the complainant is
mentioned in the complaint. The applicant will threat the witnesses
if released on bail. Hence, they prayed for rejection of the bail.
04]
The complainant resisted the bail by filing application at
Ex. 14. She alleged cheating and forgery at the hands of all the
accused. While the accused were granted interim bail, the accused
sent two unknown persons with a bond paper of 2011 and told them
to sign on the documents and threaten with dire consequence. So,
2
they have prayed that the application be rejected.
05]
Heard the learned counsel for the accused, learned APP and
learned counsel for the complainant. They have argued as per their
stands taken. The counsel for the applicant relied on the following case
laws:
a]
G. Sagar Suri and anr. vs. State of U. P. and Ors. in Appeal (Cri.)
91 of 2000 dtd. 28.01.2000.

b]
V. Y. Jose & Anr. vs. State of Gujarat and anr. in Criminal Appeal
No. 2048 of 2008 (arising out of SLP(Cri.) No. 1491 of 2007).

c]
Mrs. M. Dhanalakshmi @ Lakshmi Rajan and others. vs. State of
Karnataka in Criminal Petition No. 2386 of 2021 decided on
04.07.2022.

I have gone through the these case laws and if they are applicable to the
facts and circumstances of the case, they will be relied upon. Otherwise,
for the sake of brevity, I will not reproduce the same.
06]
I have gone through the application, say, arguments, case
law and police papers. There is prima-facie against accused no. 1
Mahesh Gangvani. He on behalf of her power of attorney holder
committed offence. Though, he executed an agreement to sell a flat to
the complainant and received Rs. 3 lacs from the complainant, still not
canceled the agreement and executed sale deed in favour of the new
purchaser. The role of present applicant is only as a power of attorney
holder of the accused no. 1. Prima-facie, she does not share common
intention with the accused no. 1. She is not beneficiary to the
transaction. She is a woman having deep roots in the society. She has
no criminal antecedent. Nothing is to be recovered from her.

Her
custodial interrogation is not required by the police. The apprehension
of complainant of alleged threat can be taken care by imposing suitable
terms and conditions. On suitable terms and conditions, she can be
released on anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order:
3
Cri. Bail Application No. 868 of 2022
ORDER
01]
Application is allowed.

02]
In the event of arrest, the accused namely Madhu
Laxman Mahtani be released on bail on executing
personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one or more
surety in the likewise amount each in crime no.
181 of 2022 registered with Upnagar Police Station
for the offences punishable under sections 420,
468, 470, 471, 472 read with 34 of the I. P. C., to
the satisfaction of I. O.

03]
The accused shall attend police station on dated
3.08.2022 & 04.08.2022 in between 11.00 a.m. to
02.00 p.m. and help to the Police in investigation
and should attend the police station, as and when
her attendances is required by the I. O.

04]
She shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the court
or to any police officer to tamper with the
evidence.

05]
She shall not tamper the prosecution evidence in
any manner.

06]
She shall not leave India without permission of this
court.

07]
She shall not commit similar type of offence.

08]
She shall furnish her detailed address with proof
and her mobile number.

09]
Inform the concerned Police station accordingly.
RATHI
ROOPESH
RAMSWARUP
Date : 30.07.2022
Digitally signed
by RATHI
ROOPESH
RAMSWARUP
Date:
2022.07.30
17:51:10 +0530
(R. R. Rathi)
Additional Sessions Judge-6,
Nashik.

4