Mumbai, Vasai, June 6, 2026 – In a significant ruling that reinforces the fine line between civil recovery and criminal prosecution, a Fast Track Court in Vasai has confirmed anticipatory bail to an accused in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case registered at Valiv (Waliv) Police Station. The Vasai court observed that the dispute between the parties was essentially civil in nature and had been deliberately given a “colour of criminal offence” to pressurize the accused.
Special Judge C.P. Jain, presiding over the Fast Track Court at Vasai, allowed the anticipatory bail application (Exhibit No. 1) filed by accused under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 — the successor to the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court confirmed an earlier ad-interim order dated August 10, 2023, ruling that custodial interrogation of the accused was not necessary for the investigation of the case.
The Case Behind the Controversy
The legal battle traces back to the year 2019, when the complainant a truck owner operating five vehicles with national permits — suffered severe financial losses due to the Corona pandemic. Forced to downsize his business, he entered into two separate agreements to sell his trucks to the applicant.
The first agreement pertained to truck bearing registration number MH-48-AY-9792. The sale consideration was fixed at Rs. 5,00,000, with the additional condition that Laskar would take over the remaining EMI payments of Rs. 63,000 per month to TATA Motors Finance Ltd., amounting to a total of approximately Rs. 22,00,000. The second agreement involved truck bearing number MH-48-AY-2377, with a consideration of Rs. 7,50,000 and the same monthly EMI liability of Rs. 63,000, totaling approximately Rs. 16,14,000.
Laskar issued two cheques — one for Rs. 5,00,000 and another for Rs. 7,50,000 — and took physical possession of both trucks. However, according to the prosecution’s case, after paying some EMIs for a limited period, Laskar defaulted on his commitments. When the financier bank started demanding the outstanding EMIs from the original complainant, he approached Laskar to deposit the post-dated cheques. The complainant alleged that Laskar repeatedly postponed payment and neither cleared the dues nor returned the trucks. Subsequently, an FIR (Cr. No. I-1209/2022) was registered at Valiv Police Station under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code.
Court’s Observations: Civil Dispute, Not Criminal Conspiracy
After hearing Advocate Dwivendra Dubey for the applicant and learned APP Smt. Mulla for the State, and after perusing the say filed by the Investigating Officer at Exhibit 10, the court made a pivotal observation.
“The story of prosecution reflects that complainant wanted to recover his money or the trucks. Therefore, it was a civil dispute for recovery based on the documents. Colour of the criminal offence is given,” the judge noted in the order.
Relying on the precedents set in Vijay Pal Prajapati Vs. State of UP and the Bombay High Court’s decision in Rajesh Shamji Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra (ABA 1052 of 2022, decided on April 28, 2022), the court held that when the underlying dispute is fundamentally about recovery of money or assets, the mere labeling of offences under Sections 406 and 420 does not automatically justify custodial arrest.
The judge further observed that the allegations and counter-allegations between the parties would ultimately have to be decided on the basis of documentary evidence in a trial. “Considering the nature, gravity and seriousness of the offences and as custodial interrogation is not necessary, applicant deserves bail,” the order stated.
Conditions of Bail
The court confirmed the earlier ad-interim anticipatory bail granted to Laskar and laid down the following conditions for his release in the event of arrest:
- He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or police.
- He shall not tamper with prosecution evidence in any manner.
- He shall not make any contact with the informant or witnesses.
- He shall furnish his current address proof and mobile phone number while furnishing surety.
- After the filing of the charge-sheet, he shall attend each and every date fixed by the learned Trial Court unless exempted.
- He shall not leave India without prior permission of the Trial Court.
The applicant was directed to furnish a personal recognizance bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety of the like amount.
A Pattern of Ad-Interim Protection
Interestingly, the Vasai court’s final order on June 6, 2026, confirmed an earlier ad-interim anticipatory bail order dated August 10, 2023, passed by another judicial officer. That original order had noted that “immediate custodial interrogation is not required” and that “if applicant is arrested then his reputation would be maligned.” That order had imposed a condition requiring Laskar to attend Valiv Police Station every Sunday between 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon — a condition that was not explicitly reiterated in the final confirmation order, suggesting that the court found compliance satisfactory.
Legal Significance and Broader Implications
Legal experts say this ruling sends a strong message to complainants who attempt to convert pure civil disputes into criminal proceedings to gain bargaining leverage. “The courts are increasingly wary of complaints under Sections 406 and 420 where the primary grievance is recovery of money or goods,” a Vasai-based criminal lawyer told this reporter on condition of anonymity. “If you have sold a truck, taken cheques, and the buyer defaults on EMIs, your remedy is before a civil court or a negotiable instruments court — not by filing a cheating case.”
The judgment also underscores the importance of the BNSS, 2023’s anticipatory bail provisions, which, like the old CrPC Section 438, are designed to protect individuals from frivolous or politically motivated arrests. The Vasai court’s reliance on the Rajesh Shamji Rathod precedent further cements the principle that when documentary evidence governs the entire transaction, custodial interrogation is rarely justified.
What Happens Next
With the anticipatory bail now confirmed, accused cannot be arrested in connection with C.R. No. 1209/2022. However, the prosecution remains at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail if any of the conditions are violated. The trial court will now proceed with the case on merits, and accused is obligated to appear before the Vasai court on all dates after the charge-sheet is filed.
The Valiv Police Station has been informed of the Vasai court’s order. Meanwhile, the complainant retains the option to pursue civil remedies for recovery of the outstanding amounts or the return of the two trucks.
For the Applicant
Advocate Mr. Dwivendra Dubey for the Applicant
For the State / Prosecution:
Learned APP Smt. Mulla – Appeared for the State
Read more:-
https://lexolive.com/bombay-high-court-grants-bail-to-18-year-old-accused/
