Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Shrikant Dnyanoba Gitte vs The State Of Maharashtra on 22 July, 2026
ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.13 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 7766/2026
[Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 04-10-2025 in BA
No. 1173/2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at
Aurangabad]
SHRIKANT DNYANOBA GITTE Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s)
IA No. 107144/2026 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
Date : 22-07-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR
Ms. Damini Vishwakarma, Adv.
Mr. B. Dhananjay, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Varad Kilor, Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR
Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.
Mr Anurag Gharote, Adv.(through VC)*
Mr. Shreyas Gacche, Adv.
Mr. T. R. B. Sivakumar, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Heard Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Shreyas Gacche, learned counsel for
defacto complainant and Mr. Anurag Gharote, learned counsel for
Signature Not Verified
the State.
Digitally signed by
NIRMALA NEGI
Date: 2026.07.22
19:27:13 IST
Reason: 2. The present petition calls in question the correctness of
the order dated 04-10-2025 in BA No. 1173/2025 passed by the
High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Aurangabad. By the said
order, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected.
3. When the matter came up for hearing on 29.05.2026, this
Court enlarging the petitioner on interim bail, made the
following order:-
“1. Heard Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, learned
counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anurag Gharote, learned
counsel for the State and Mr. Shreyas Gacche, learned
counsel for the complainant.
2. When this matter came up for hearing on 15.04.2026,
the following order was passed by this Court:
“1. Heard Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner.
2. Delay condoned.
3. At the very outset, Mr. Amol Suryawanshi, learned
counsel, after obtaining instructions and on the own
volition of the petitioner, submits that according to
the petitioner, the balance amount payable to the
complainant is Rs.21,00,000/- (Rupees twenty one
lakhs). Learned counsel submits that already a sum of
Rs.29,00,000/- (Rupees twenty nine lakhs) has been
deposited in the Court and for an amount equivalent
to Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs), a land parcel
has been transferred in the name of the complainant.
Apart from this, another amount of Rs.10,00,000/-
(Rupees ten lakhs) has been transferred in the
account of the complainant. That leaves the balance
of Rs.21,00,000/- (Rupees twenty one lakhs) which the
petitioner on his own volition submits that he will
deposit the balance amount within a month in the
Trial Court.
4. Issue notice subject to the condition that the
petitioner deposits, as undertaken, a sum of
Rs.21,00,000/- (Rupees twenty one lakhs) with the
Trial Court on or before 14th May, 2026.
5. Mr. Varad Kilor, learned counsel appears and
accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
6. List the matter on 18th May, 2026.”
3. In compliance thereof, the amount of Rs.21,00,000/-
has been deposited in the concerned Trial Court.
According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the
complainant in this matter is secured for the amount of
Rs.70,00,000/- with the deposit of Rs.21,00,000/-.
4. Last time, when the matter came up for hearing on
18.05.2026, the State had taken time to file a status
report/counter affidavit. Till today, nothing is filed.
5. The petitioner is in custody for about 02 years.
6. Under these circumstances, we are inclined to enlarge
the petitioner on interim bail.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is enlarged on interim
bail subject to the satisfaction of the District &
Sessions Judge-2, Nanded, District Nanded, Maharashtra
(for short, ‘Sessions Court at Nanded’), in connection
with Crime No.03/2024 (Special Case No.26/2024)
registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Nanded,
District Nanded, Maharashtra for the offences punishable
under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3 & 4 of the
Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in
Financial Establishments)Act, 1999.
8. The Sessions Court at Nanded inter alia impose a
condition to the effect that the petitioner will report
at the local Police Station once in a week.
9. The amount lying in deposit in the concerned Trial
Court shall be kept in a short term FDR in a
Nationalized Bank on auto renewal basis.
10. List the matter on 22nd July, 2026.
11. In the meantime, a last opportunity is given to the
State to file a status report/counter affidavit.”
4. We have also seen the status report/counter affidavit
filed by the State pursuant to the said order.
5. Considering the fact that the petitioner has undergone
about two years before he was released on interim bail and that
post the release of interim bail, there have been no complaints
against the petitioner, we are inclined to confirm the order
dated 29.05.2026 granting interim bail to the petitioner.
6. The petitioner shall continue to be on bail on the same
terms during the pendency of the trial.
7. Learned counsel the defacto- complainant submits that the
amount so deposited before the concerned Trial Court, should be
released to the defacto-complainant.
8. Learned counsel for the State submits that there are
other aggrieved parties.
9. We say nothing on this aspect here. The defacto-
complainant is at liberty to file an application before the
concerned Trial Court and the said Court may keeping in mind
all the factors involved, make an appropriate order in
accordance with law.
10. With the above observations, the special leave petition
is disposed of.
11. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
of.
(NIRMALA NEGI) (MANOJ KUMAR) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) *appearance not given
