CRI. BA 309/2024
1
ORDER
MHCC020022262024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 309 OF 2024
( CNR NO.: MHCC02-002226-2024 )
NIRAJ MANSUKHLAL VED
Aged: 59 years, Occ: Business,
Residing at 501, 5th Floor,
Shreeji Tower, 1st & 4th Road,
Opp. Home Fresh, Rajawadi,
Ghatkopar East, Mumbai 400 077.
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Bhandup
Police Station vide C.R.No.344/2022)
…Applicant/Accused
…Respondent/State.

Appearance:Ld. Advocate Vaibhav Jagtap for the applicant/accused.
Ld. S. P.P. S.V. Kekanis and Ld. S.P.P Manisha J. Parmar for the
State/respondent.
Ld. Advocate Tushar Mommaiyah for intervener.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
S.M. TAPKIRE (C.R.60)
DATE : 02.05.2024.

CRI. BA 309/2024
2
ORDER
ORDER
1.

This is an application under Section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C) in
connection with the crime vide C.R. No. 344 of 2022 dated 25.05.2022
registered with respondent/state for the offences punishable under
Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 506 of the Indian Penal
Code,1860.
2.

The respondent/state and intervenor have strongly opposed
to the bail plea of the applicant on various grounds by filing their
written say/submission and written notes of argument at Exh –3 and
Exh-7 respectively.
3.

Perused the application, plea submissions, grounds raised
therein coupled with the documents placed reliance by the applicant.
Also, perused the written say/objection of respondent/state. Heard Ld.
Advocate for the applicant, intervenor and the Ld. S.P.P. for
respondent/state.
4.

Having heard to the rival parties and considered their
raised submissions contentions and record availed prima-facie it
inclined in impugned crime the applicant, his companion co-accused are
involved. The pre-arrest bail plea raised by him by ABA No.1359 of
2022 is pleased to rejected by order dated 17.07.2023. Thereon, prearrest bail plea raised by him before the Hon’ble High Court Judicature
at Bombay is also rejected by order dated 28.08.2023. The Special
Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.15083 of 2023 raised before the Hon’ble
CRI. BA 309/2024
3
ORDER
Apex Court is also declined by order dated 25.01.2024. Thereon, he is
arrested on 16.12.2023. Thereupon, charge-sheet has been submitted.
The same is registered by as Criminal Case No.28 of 2024. His bail plea
raised before the Ld. Trial Court is pleased to rejected by order dated
24.01.2024. He comes with the case that with regard to the same and
similar dispute of project of construction against him various offences
raised. He has executed registered documents in favour of informant.
However, due to negligence and reluctance of her transaction could not
complied. He has not lured cheated deceived to her by any manner. But
the alleged dispute comes under purview of civil dispute. With regard to
said construction project civil matter is already raised before the
Hon’ble Court. The same is subjudiced. In view of allegations levelled
against him no any alleged offence made out constitute by any manner.
Furthermore, the investigation is completed and charge-sheet is also
submitted. The material substantial allegations grievance are just in
regard to documentary evidence. The same is already collected and
enclosed with the charge-sheet. Though against him in all nine crimes
are raised and pending. Wherein he has got liberty. The said crimes are
just concern with one and same construction project. Therefore, he
deserve for liberty.
5.

The respondent/state and intervenor have strongly opposed
to the bail plea of applicant principally by raising objection grievance
that the pre-arrest bail plea of him declined by all court. He has not
complied the condition of his undertaking submitted before the Hon’ble
Apex Court. Though he has executed the registered document in regard
to shop allotted to informant. However, the same alienated transferred
by him to other person. He has accepted huge amount of
CRI. BA 309/2024
4
ORDER
Rs.1,05,24,687/- from informant and victim. However, the said
premises alienated sale out to others by preparing forged documents.
He is habituated to commit similar in natures serious economic crime.
In that regard sufficient considerable record material is availed. The
informant is also reiterated all such objections.
6.

In above such circumstance cautiously considered the
entire record material availed raised submissions contentions objections
by it prima-facie inclined the applicant has allotted shop no.5 to
informant and the registered agreement made and registered in her
favour by accepting huge consideration amounts. Moreover, he has time
to time accepted further amounts. However, the said shop premises no.5
alienated by him to other purchaser Balendra Singh and his business
partner by showing the said shop by as shop nos.4 and 4(a). Moreover,
thereafter also allegedly he has executed the certain documents in
favour of complainant. The same are also not complied. In fact, when
not having any premises with him to give the informant. It reveals
against him in all nine crimes have been raised and pending. In
impugned matter huge amount of Rs.1,05,24,687/- is involved.
Considering the modus, conduct, behave of applicant to grab the hard
earned amount of premises purchaser as well as tendency to execute
unlawful forged dubious document of one and same premises in favour
of multiple persons. The same is certainly seriously considerable,
cognizable. Moreover, in that regard sufficient considerable evidence is
availed. Thereby, though the charge-sheet is submitted. However, in the
submissions grounds raised by the applicant prima-facie does not
incline justified substance force. Hence, I am not inclined to have the
relief sought by the applicant. With this passed the following order.

CRI. BA 309/2024
5
ORDER
:ORDER:
The present Criminal Bail Application No. 309 of 2024 is hereby
rejected and disposed of accordingly.
Dictated and pronounced in open court
SHRIRAM
MADHUKAR
TAPKIRE
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Date of sign
: 02.05.2024
: 03.05.2024
: 04.05.2024
Digitally
signed by
SHRIRAM
MADHUKAR
TAPKIRE
Date:
2024.05.04
16:27:13
+0530
(S.M. Tapkire)
Addl. Sessions Judge
Sessions Court,
Mumbai. C.R. 60
CRI. BA 309/2024
6
ORDER
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
04/05/2024, 4.27 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
Mr. Prasad S. Pednekar
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court Room No.)

HHJ S.M. Tapkire,(C.R.No.60)
Addl. Sessions Judge.,City Civil & Sessions
Court, Mumbai.

Date of pronouncement of Judgment/Order
02.05.2024
Order signed by P.O. on
04.05.2024
Order uploaded on
04.05.2024