Mumbai, Maharashtra – June 30, 2022 – Sanjay Gangaram Katalkar has been granted bail in a land fraud case registered at Mahim Police Station (C.R. No. 302/2020). The Additional Sessions Judge, R.J. Katariya, of the City Civil and Sessions Court for Greater Bombay, approved Katalkar’s bail application (Bail Application No. 1083 of 2022) citing the principle of parity with a co-accused who had already been granted bail.
Background of the Case:
Katalkar was arrested and charged under Sections 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 409 (criminal breach of trust by1 banker, merchant or agent), 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 506 (criminal intimidation) read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Allegations2 and Arrest:
According to the prosecution, the complainant, Vijay Mhaske, was looking to purchase land in Dapoli, Ratnagiri, in 2016. He was introduced to co-accused Vijay Pawar, who showed him various properties. Pawar assured Mhaske he could get land for Rs. 4,00,000 per acre or less. Mhaske, who was handicapped and unable to travel, gave Pawar a power of attorney. Pawar and Katalkar allegedly obtained various cheques and cash amounts from Mhaske under the pretext of paying farmers for their land. The prosecution alleges that they obtained Rs. 3,52,50,000, while the actual cost of the land was Rs. 2,80,00,000, resulting in a fraud of Rs. 1,30,00,000.
Defense Arguments:
Mr. Vivek Arote, representing Katalkar, argued that his client was falsely implicated. He highlighted that co-accused Vijay Pawar, who had a more significant role, had already been granted bail. He argued that the principle of parity applied and that Katalkar, who had been in custody since his arrest, should also be granted bail. He cited several case laws in support of his argument.
Prosecution’s Counter-Arguments:
Ms. Rayakar, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), opposed the bail application, arguing that there was no change in circumstances and that the principle of parity did not apply. She emphasized Katalkar’s role in the crime and its serious nature.
Intervener’s Arguments:
Mr. Abhijeet Mantri, representing the intervener, also opposed the bail application, arguing that the order granting bail to co-accused Vijay Pawar was obtained by misrepresentation. He contended that Katalkar had participated in the crime and that the principle of parity did not apply. He cited a case law arguing that mere parity cannot be the sole ground for granting bail.
Court’s Observations and Decision:
Judge Katariya noted the allegations against Katalkar and his involvement with co-accused Vijay Pawar. However, he also noted that Vijay Pawar, who had a major role in the crime, had been granted bail by his predecessor. He observed that Katalkar had been in custody since February 9, 2021, and that his role was less significant than Pawar’s.
“As coaccused Vijay is released on bail, ground of parity is applicable to applicant. Considering the matter, it would not be appropriate to keep applicant behind bars indefinitely. There are no criminal antecedents against the applicant. There would not be prejudice to the prosecution if appropriate conditions are imposed against the applicant granting bail to him,” Judge Katariya stated in his order.
The court concluded that the principle of parity applied and that granting bail with appropriate conditions would not prejudice the prosecution.
Bail Conditions:
The court granted bail to Katalkar, subject to the following conditions:
- He must furnish a fresh Personal Recognizance (PR) bond of Rs. 50,000 with one or more sureties of the same amount.
- He must not commit any other or similar offenses.
- He must provide documents of his permanent and temporary residential addresses.
- He must not leave Maharashtra without court permission.
- He must not tamper with prosecution witnesses.
- He was granted provisional cash bail for eight weeks.
Significance of the Ruling:
This ruling highlights the court’s application of the principle of parity in bail matters, particularly when co-accused with more significant roles have already been granted bail. The court’s decision underscores that in cases where the accused has no prior criminal record and the investigation is largely complete, bail can be granted with appropriate conditions to ensure the accused’s presence and prevent witness tampering.
Key Factors in the Bail Grant:
- Grant of bail to co-accused Vijay Pawar.
- Katalkar’s lesser role in the crime.
- Katalkar’s prolonged custody.
- Lack of criminal antecedents.
- Conditions to ensure Katalkar’s presence and prevent witness tampering.
Future Proceedings:
The trial will proceed in the City Civil and Sessions Court. The prosecution will be required to prove the charges against Katalkar and the other accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The court will monitor Katalkar’s compliance with the bail conditions.