Bombay High Court

Bombay High Court: Anticipatory Bail Granted in Loan Fraud Case

Updated
Oct 13, 2025 6:53 PM
News Image

In a recent decision, the Bombay High Court allowed Nitin Suryabhan Upadhye to stay out of jail while awaiting trial. He was accused in a case involving a loan fraud with Tirupathi Urban Cooperative Credit Society. The decision was made by Judge Sandesh D. Patil.

The Case: Loan Fraud Allegations

Nitin Suryabhan Upadhye, along with others, was accused of causing a loss of over 3.55 crore rupees to the Tirupathi Urban Cooperative Credit Society. The accusations came up when it was found that a property used as loan security was already promised to another finance company. The police report was filed in July 2025, but the case goes back to loans taken in 2018.

"The complainant alleged a plan to get loans using property already promised to someone else."

Nitin's Defense: No Cheating Intent

Nitin's lawyer argued that he had taken a loan of 21.5 lakh rupees in February 2018, which was approved and partly paid back. The defense pointed out that there was no plan to cheat from the start, as a large amount had already been paid back.

"The applicant has paid back an amount of Rs.8,65,000/- so far."

Court's Decision: Bail Conditions

Judge Sandesh D. Patil noted that there was a long delay in starting the legal proceedings, which began in December 2024, long after a recovery document was issued in 2019. The court decided that keeping Nitin in custody was not needed, allowing him to stay out of jail with certain conditions.

  • Nitin must check in at the Faraskhana Police Station as needed.
  • He should not mess with evidence or try to influence witnesses.
  • A personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with guarantees was set.

Summary of the Verdict

The court pointed out that criminal law shouldn't be used just to get back money owed. This decision follows the idea that there must be a clear plan to cheat from the start for a criminal charge to be valid.

"Criminal law cannot be set into motion for the purpose of recovering an amount."

This case highlights the complexities involved in financial fraud cases and the importance of timely legal actions.