Rani Alias Vidyarani Basavraj Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2429 OF 2025 Rani Alias Vidyarani Basavraj Patil .... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ----- Mr. B. R. Mangale, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Nitin B. Patil APP for the State ----- CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 14th NOVEMBER, 2025.

by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date:

2025.11.18 14:43:34 +0530 SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM P.C. :

1.

The Applicant is apprehending arrest in Crime No.74 of 2025 registered at Barshi Town Police Station, Tal: Barshi, District: Solapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 3(5) of the of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNS Act"), and Sections 3(A) and 6(A) of the Passport Act, 1950 and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act,, 1946 and Section 3(1) of the Foreigners Order, 1948.

2.

It is prosecution's case that the Anti Terrorism Squad, Solapur received secret information that some Bangladeshi Citizens are staying at Pankaj Nagar, Barshi illegally. Hence, the ATS team Shantanu S. Dhudum 1/3

along with police raided Pankaj Nagar and they found some Bangladeshi Citizens staying there illegally. In investigation, it was revealed that the Applicant and other co-accused helped the Bangladeshi Citizens to stay there.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. One Rani Gaikwad has helped them i.e. Bangladeshi Citizens. The Bangladeshi Citizens were staying in the house of Rani Gaikwad and the Applicant is not concerned with the Bangladeshi Citizens staying there. Considering allegations against the Applicant, her custodial interrogation is not required, and requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP that the police have recorded the statement of Rani Gaikwad in whose house the Bangladeshi Citizens were staying on rental basis. She has stated that the Applicant had inquired with her about providing room on rental basis. Accordingly, the Applicant contacted co-accused i.e. Rehana Begum who is a Bangladeshi Citizen, and provided room to them on rental basis in the house of Rani Gaikwad. It shows the involvement of the Applicant in the said Crime. Considering allegations against the Applicant, her custodial interrogation is Shantanu S. Dhudum 2/3

required, and requested to reject the application. 5.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused F.I.R. and documents produced on record.

6.

Allegations against the Applicant are that she inquired with witness Rani Gaikwad about giving her rooms on rental basis, and then she contacted co-accused i.e. Rehana Begum who is a Bangladeshi Citizen and provided room to them on rental basis in the house of Rani Gaikwad. It shows that the Applicant was in contact with Bangladeshi Citizens. The Bangladeshi Nationals were staying illegally, the Applicant had helped them to get the shelter. Investigation is in progress. Though charge-sheet is filed, the Applicant is shown as absconding. Considering the allegations against the Applicant, her custodial interrogation is required, and I pass following order:

ORDER

i. The Application is rejected.

7.

In view of the aforesaid terms, the application is rejected and disposed off.

8.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. ( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/3