##PAGE1##

2025:BHC-AS:58006

10-APPLN-478-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 478 OF 2025

Ganesh Dattaram Phatak … Applicant

Versus

State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents

--------------------

Mr. Atharva S. Jagtap along with Mr. Sujit Jagtap, Ms. Ankita Phatak,

Mr. Hemant Pisal, for the Applicant.

Mr. Samir Mangaonkar along with Mr. Mayur Sonavane, APP for the

Respondent-State.

Mr. Shekhar Pawar, PSI, R. A. K. Marg Police Station, Mumbai.

--------------------

CORAM : SANDESH D. PATIL, J.

DATE : 31st DECEMBER, 2025.

(VACATION COURT)

P.C.:

1. By the present Application, the Applicant is seeking setting aside

the condition of giving Bank Guarantee of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rs. 20 lacs

only) imposed upon the Applicant vide order dated 04/12/2025 passed

by the learned J.M.F.C., Dadar in CC No.925/PW/2025 while allowing

the bail application preferred by the Applicant.

Manisha 1/4

::: Uploaded on - 01/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 01/03/2026 17:09:52 :::

10-APPLN-478-2025.doc

2. Mr. Atharva S. Jagtap, learned Counsel appearing for the

Applicant states that he has challenged only that part of the Order

wherein Bank Guarantee of Rs.20,00,000/- is imposed. He states that

as far as the remaining condition of furnishing the PR Bond of

Rs.1,00,000/- with one solvent surety is concerned, he has not

challenged the same.

3. Mr. Mayur S. Sonavane, learned A.P.P for the Respondent-State,

states that the Order is just and proper and at the highest the amount

of Bank Guarantee can be reduced.

4. The Order was passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Dadar, Mumbai

on 04/12/2025. Inspite of bail being granted, the Applicant is unable to

come out of jail only because of the onerous condition imposed upon

him for furnishing Bank Guarantee of Rs.20,00,000/-. It is settled

position of law that such a pre-condition of furnishing Bank Guarantee

is not permissible.

Manisha 2/4

::: Uploaded on - 01/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 01/03/2026 17:09:52 :::

10-APPLN-478-2025.doc

5. It is required to take into consideration that, inspite of the Order

dated 04/12/2025, the Applicant is languishing in jail only on account

of not furnishing of the Bank Guarantee condition of Bank Guarantee

of Rs.20,00,000/-. The offence is under Sections 406, 420 read with

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Taking into consideration

the settled law on this issue, since the condition imposed of furnishing

Bank Guarantee of Rs.20,00,000/-, in my opinion is unreasonable, the

same is relaxed. The Application is therefore allowed in terms of

prayer Clause ‘a’ which reads as under;

“ a. This Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set

aside the specific conditions of giving a bank guarantee

of Rs.20,00,000/- vide order dated 04/12/2025 passed

by the Ld. JMFC, Dadar in CC No.925/pw/2025

thereby allowing the Bail Application preferred by the

Applicant and on such terms and conditions as this

Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper;”

6. All other conditions of the Order dated 04/12/2025 shall

however remain intact.

Manisha 3/4

::: Uploaded on - 01/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 01/03/2026 17:09:52 :::

10-APPLN-478-2025.doc

7. The Application is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

8. All concerned parties to act on the authenticated copy of this

order.

(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)

Manisha 4/4

::: Uploaded on - 01/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 01/03/2026 17:09:52 :::