Jay Sudarshan Khichi v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1318 OF 2025 Jay S. Khichi ...Applicant V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent.
..............
Adv. Shushrut Jadhwar for the Applicant.
Mr. P.H. Gaikwad, APP for the Respondent/State. PSI Bhairavnath Shelke, Badlapur Police Station is present. ..............
CORAM
:
N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE :
20.09.2025.
P.C. :
1.
This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2.
The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 82 of 2025 registered at Badlapur Police Station, Dist. Thane for the offences punishable under Sections 308(4), 309(4), 126(2), 189(2), 190, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nayaya Sanhita, 2023. 3.
The allegations against the applicant and co-accused are of extortion.
4.
It is alleged that on 15th January 2025, at about 5:35 a.m., co-accused Pravin Khichi intercepted the first informant's car at Aptewadi Naka and threatened him that he should not run his business in that area and if he wished to do the business, then he would have to make monthly payments to him.
1/3
5.
It is alleged that on 18th January 2025, the co-accused Pravin Khichi had called the first informant to his office located in front of Sun and Shade Hotel at Badlapur East and at that time the present Applicant was also there. It is alleged that they demanded a sum of Rs. 2 Lakh from him and warned him of dire consequences if their demand is not met. It is alleged that on 2nd February 2025 the co-accused Pravin Khichi and his associates extended similar threat to the brother of the first informant and took away Rs.1,800/- from him.
6.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent / State. 7.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the alleged crime. It is submitted that the only allegation against the Applicant is that on 18th January 2025 he was present with the co-accused Pravin Khichi. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation as nothing is to be recovered from the applicant.
8.
On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State submits that the applicant is involved in serious crime of extortion. It is submitted that mobile phone of the co-accused Pravin Khichi, which he used for commission of the crime, is in possession of the applicant. It is submitted that to recover the said mobile phone, custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary. It is further submitted that the applicant is involved in four more crimes 2/3
including crimes for the offence punishable under Sections 307 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that the applicant therefore may not be released on anticipatory bail. 9.
I have perused the FIR. There are specific allegations against the present applicant. The applicant is involved in four more crimes. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the Application is rejected.
[N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3