Bhavani Ranjeet Singh @ Monty v. The State Of Maharashtra

Digitally signed by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date:

2025.07.04 20:38:47 +0530 CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No.1810 of 2025 Bhavani Ranjeet Singh @ Monty Age: 19 years, Occ: Student R/at-Flat No.402, Arunoday Apartment, Plot No.268, Sector-26A, Vashi, Navi Mumbai ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra I/O Vashi Police Station, Navi Mumbai ... Respondent ---- Mr Raviraj Paramane, a/w. Mr Deva Shinde, for the applicant. Mr Swapnil Walve, APP, for the respondent/ State. API Yogesh Bhosale, Vashi Police Station, is present. ---- Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.

Date: 4 July 2025.

P.C.:

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.87 of 2025, registered at Vashi Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 118(2), 117(2), and 115(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

According to the prosecution, on 15 February 2025, while

the injured was on his way home and had momentarily stopped to urinate, he was attacked by a group of three to four unidentified individuals. The assailants used punches and kicks, and also wielded a weapon during the assault. As a result of this attack, the injured sustained injuries.

3.

Mr Raviraj Paramane, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, asserts the applicant's innocence and contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The learned Counsel submits that, save for the applicant's alleged presence at the scene of the incident, no specific or overt act has been attributed to him which would suggest any active participation in the commission of the alleged offence. A bare perusal of the remand report reveals that the weapon purportedly used in the offence was allegedly wielded by a co-accused, and not by the applicant. According to the learned Counsel, the allegations against the applicant are vague and devoid of any concrete particulars. The co-accused have already been granted bail and there is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant. If granted bail, the applicant is ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court.

4.

Mr Swapnil Walve, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State, opposes the

applicant's request for pre-arrest bail and contends that the offence is of a serious nature. However, the learned APP acknowledges that the investigation has concluded and culminated in a charge sheet, with nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicant.

5.

Upon perusing the records, it appears that the use of the weapon in the alleged offence was by the co-accused and not by the applicant, and nothing is to be recovered or discovered from the applicant. The investigation has concluded, nothing is to be recovered or discovered from the applicant, and a charge sheet has already been filed. Furthermore, the co-accused have been granted bail. To address the prosecution's apprehensions about evidence tampering and witness influence, appropriate conditions can be imposed. In the circumstances, this Court deems it fit to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

(i) In the event of the applicant's arrest in connection with CR No.87 of 2025, registered at Vashi Police Station, Navi Mumbai, he shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like

amount.

(ii) The applicant, himself or through any other person, shall not indulge in any activity that may tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.

6.

The application stands disposed of accordingly. (R.N. Laddha, J.)