MHCC020024882024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI,
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 353 OF 2024
Smt. Anuradha Kirtikumar Ghorpade
Aged 42 years, R/at : Room No. 05,
Shree Sadguru Krupa, Madhuban Society,
Line -9, Old Sangavi, Pune.

… Applicant/accused
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
(Tilak Nagar Police Station)
… Respondent
Appearances :Mr. Ratnakar Daware, Ld. Adv. for applicant.
Mr. Ramesh Siroya, Ld. SPP for State/respondent.
CORAM : H. H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
SHRI A. A. KULKARNI (C.R. NO.22)
DATED : 20th February, 2024
ORDER
This is an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for bail.
Heard Ld. Advocate for applicant and Ld. APP for the state. Perused
application, say and other documents on record.
2.

It is contention of the applicant that the applicant is
arrested by Tilak Nagar Police Station, Mumbai in connection with
-2-
BA 353/24
crime no. 40/2024 for the offence punishable u/secs. 395, 392, 170,
120(b), 201 r/w sec. 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 25 of Indian Arms Act.
It is contention of applicant that applicant is wife of accused Kritikumar
Ghorpade. As per the case of prosecution on 16.01.2024 accused
Kirtikumar Ghorpade handed over amount of crime proceeds to
applicant. During investigation police seized mobile phone of applicant
as well as amount of Rs.3,80,000/- at her instance. In such
circumstances, nothing is remained to be seized at the instance of
applicant. As per allegations applicant has not played any active role at
the time of commission of offence. Her limited role is alleged to help
accused Kirtikumar Ghorpade to conceal amount of crime proceeds
therefore, prima facie no offence is under Section 395,392,170 and
120B attract against applicant. Therefore, there is no need of further
custodial interrogation of applicant. Applicant has not criminal
antecedents. Applicant is residing at Pune and permanent resident of
Mahaligraiwadi at Osmanabad. Applicant is ready to abide any
conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed for grant of bail.
3.

Ld. APP and IO opposed the application. It is their
contention that if applicant is released on bail, she will not co-operate
for further investigation of the case. Applicant has deleted conversation
recorded on her mobile phone and thereby destroyed evidence. Amount
of Rs. 34,24,000/- is yet to be seized involved in this case. Hence,
prayed for rejection of application.
4.

In view of submissions from both sides and on perusal of
first information report,
incident occurred on 16.01.2024 at about
11.00 am at Amar Mahal Junction Bridge, Chembur, Mumbai. At
-3-
BA 353/24
relevant time informant Pankaj Singh was traveling in car with driver
Vinod More. At that time he was having cash of Rs.1,50,000/- with him
as well as office employee Mr. Dhiraj Wadhwan. At relevant time
unknown persons represented him as CBI officer and taken away bags
from the car and asked them to come CBI Office with them. When they
went
to
CBI
personification
Office
at
BKC
they
came
to
know
that
by
some one taken away bags with them. If the entire
incident is taking in to consideration there is no role of present
applicant in commission of snatching money from the informant. Her
role is allegedly limited to the extent of concealing amount of
Rs.3,80,000/- and destroying her conversation with accused Kirtikumar
Ghorpade. Her mobile phone and amount is seized by police. In such
circumstances, there is no need of further custodial interrogation. Her
presence is secured by imposing conditions. Hence, I am of the opinion
that applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Hence, I pass following
order :ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No.353 of 2024 is allowed.

2.

Applicant/accused Smt. Anuradha Kirtikumar Ghorpade be
released on bail on his furnishing P.R. and S.B. Bond of
Rs.1,00,000/- along with one or more sureties in the like amount
in connection with C.R. No.40/2024 registered with Tilak Nagar
police station.

3.

Applicant/accused are directed to appear before police as and
when required of further investigation till filing of the chargesheet.

4.

Applicant/accused shall furnish his residential address proof
and contact numbers to Investigating Officer.

-45.

BA 353/24
Applicant/accused 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 him from disclosing such facts
to the Court or to any Police Officer.

6.

Applicant/accused shall not leave India without previous
permission of the Court.

7.

Bail before learned Court below.

8.

Criminal Bail Application No.353 of 2024 stands disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 20.02.2024
Dictacted on : 20.02.2024
Transcribed on : 21.02.2024
HHJ signed on : 21.02.2024
(A. A. Kulkarni)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (C.R.No.22)
-5-
BA 353/24
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
21.02.2024
5.30 p.m.

(Mrs. Manasi Kadam)
Name of the Judge (With Court HHJ SHRI. A.A. KULKARNI (CR 22)
Room No.)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGMENT /ORDER
of
20.02.2024
JUDGMENT /ORDER signed by
P.O. on
21.02.2024
JUDGMENT /ORDER uploaded
on
21.02.2024