2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 6528
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
ASHISH PRAVIN BHALERAO – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent
BA 4282 / 2024
Ashish IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY A S M A S H H H A I E S S B K H R E AO DASM D11 ASi a H g :t HH 0 i e A t 9 IE : a S S : B 2 l 5 K H 0 y R 9 E 2 A s +5 i O g .00 n 58 e 3. d 20 2 by CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4282 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1637 OF 2025 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.4282 OF 2024 Ashish Pravin Bhalerao … Applicant V/s.
State of Maharashra … Respondent Mr. Dinesh Patankar for the applicant.
Mrs.Mahalakshmi Ganapathy, APP for respondent No.1-State.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. RESERVED ON : AUGUST 20, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : AUGUST 22, 2025 ORDER :
1. By the instant bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.” for short), the applicant is seeking his release on regular bail in connection with Crime Register No. 191 of 2023 registered with Kalachowki Police Station, Mumbai. The said crime has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC” for short) read with Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (“MPID Act” for short).
2. The case of the prosecution, as can be gathered from the First Information Report, is that the original informant, Smt. Kashibai Balu Raymane, lodged a report at Kalachowki Police Station, alleging that she had opened Account No. 419 in the year 2011 with Mumbai Nagari Sahakari Pathsanstha at Kharghar, Navi Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as “the Pathsanstha”). According to her, the account was opened on the assurances extended by one of the Directors of the Pathsanstha, namely, Ashish Pravin Bhalerao. On the strength of such assurances, the informant deposited an initial sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs only) in the form of a Fixed Deposit with the said Pathsanstha and received regular interest thereon in the initial period.
3. The informant has further alleged that having developed faith and confidence in the said financial establishment, she continued to invest further amounts with the Pathsanstha. Between 07th January 2014 and 26th April 2022, she is stated to have made further deposits, thereby investing a cumulative amount of Rs. 46,54,500/- (Rupees Forty-Six Lakhs Fifty-Four Thousand Five Hundred only) towards share certificates and allied instruments of the Pathsanstha.
4. It is alleged that when the informant urgently required funds for her medical treatment, specifically for undergoing gallstone surgery, she approached the Directors of the Pathsanstha, namely, Ashish Bhalerao, Usha Sawant, Amit Bhalerao, as well as the Manager and President, one Shantaram Tupe, seeking refund of her matured Fixed Deposit Receipts. At that time, she was instructed to submit her request in writing. Acting on such instruction, she submitted a formal written application and also dispatched the same by Speed Post. However, no action was taken by the concerned office bearers.
5. The informant has further alleged that despite repeated personal visits and several assurances given by the above-named Directors and office bearers, her matured deposits were never refunded. Being left with no choice, she approached the statutory authority i.e., the Commissioner and Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Pune, by filing a Complaint Application. The said authority, by its order dated 22nd June 2023, directed the Pathsanstha to refund the amount within 10 days and submit compliance.
6. The informant has further alleged that, like her, another investor, namely, one Mr. Rohit Pisal, was also directed by the authority to be refunded his invested amount. However, in his case too, the directive was not honoured. It is further alleged that the Cooperative Authority had also directed the Pathsanstha to furnish its financial accounts for the years 2019 to 2022 to the Special Auditor, but that statutory direction too was not complied with by the concerned Directors and officials.
7. The allegations of t