Salman Khalil Shaikh v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2026:BHC-AUG:1248 1 924ABA1794.2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 924 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1794 OF 2025 Salman Khalil Shaikh
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another ...
Mr. Ameya N. Sabnis - Advocate for the Applicant Mr. V. M. Kagne - APP for the State ...
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
DATED : 13TH JANUARY, 2026 PER COURT : - 1.
The present Application for Anticipatory Bail has been preferred by the original Accused No. 6. The FIR is registered by Complainant - Birendra Ram Khiladi for the offences punishable under Sections 140(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. The allegations of the Complainant in the FIR that, on 25.12.2024, he was abducted by the accused persons for a ransom of Rs. 58,000/-. The amounts were paid via PhonePe and some cash was also paid by the Complainant.
2.
The learned Advocate appearing for the Applicant has invited my attention to the contents of the FIR submitting that the name of the present applicant is not reflected in the FIR and he was not part of
2 924ABA1794.2025.odt the accused persons, who have actually committed the alleged offence. He further submitted that, during the course of the investigation, one co-accused's statement was recorded by the police in which the present applicant's name has been taken by the said co-accused. He further submitted that, though the statement is not admissible in evidence as being the statement given to the police, still perusal of the said statement shows that the role assigned to the present applicant is only in respect of standing on a bridge for giving location to the main accused persons. Apart from that, there is no allegation against the present applicant and even no material in respect of being in receipt of the ransom money.
3.
The learned APP appearing for the State informs that the charge-sheet has already been filed and investigation is complete. He opposes the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the offence is serious and requires custodial interrogation of the Applicant. 4.
On perusal of copy of the FIR, the submission of the learned Advocate for the Applicant seems to be correct that the Applicant has not been named in the FIR and there is no role assigned to the Applicant of being the participant in commissioning of main offence. In the light of the submissions of the learned APP that the investigation is complete, the charge-sheet has already been filed and further more, except one
3 924ABA1794.2025.odt accused, by name, Sachdeo Pawar, all the other co-accused persons have been released on bail. In the light of the above, I am inclined to grant this Anticipatory Bail Application. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
[i] The Application is allowed.
[ii] In the event of arrest of the Applicant, Salman Khalil Shaikh in connection with Crime No. 0513 of 2024 registered with Pachod Police Station, Aurangabad Rural, for offences punishable under Sections 140(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, he be released on bail on his furnishing P.B. of Rs. 25,000/- [Rupees Twenty Five Thousand], with one surety in the like amount. [iii] The Applicant shall attend the Investigating Officer as and when called and cooperate with the investigation. [iv] The applicant shall not tamper with evidence or influence any witness or the complainant in any manner whatsoever. [v] The Application is disposed of.
[HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR] JUDGE SG Punde Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 14/01/2026 14:48:33