Pradeep Mahendra Singh v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2181 of 2025 Pradeep Mahendra Singh Age 31 years, Occ. Service, Residing at: C-95, Navjivan Society, Road No.3, Near Thakur College, Singh Estate, Samta Nagar, Kandivali (E), Mumbai - 400 101.
... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra (Through Samta Nagar Police Station)
...Respondent
---- Mr Prem Tauna i/b Mr Shailendra Mishra, for the Applicant. Mr A S Shalgaonkar, APP, for Respondent / State. API Yogesh Ramekar, Samta Nagar Police Station, Mumbai. ---- Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 5 August 2025 P.C.:
Digitally signed by MAMTA AMAR KALE Date:
2025.08.06 13:01:42 +0530 MAMTA AMAR KALE .
By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.550 of 2025, registered at Samta Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 118(2), 115(2), 352, and 351(3) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that there
has been a substantial and unexplained delay in the lodging of the FIR. The alleged incident is said to have taken place on 30 June 2025, whereas the FIR was registered only on 2 July 2025, with no cogent explanation offered for this delay. The learned Counsel further points out that there are no specific allegations against the applicant regarding the use of any weapon.
3.
Drawing the attention of this Court to a receipt dated 1 July 2025, pertaining to a UPI transaction, the learned Counsel submits that the applicant had, in fact, transferred an amount of Rs.12,000/- to the first informant on the said date. It is noteworthy that the FIR came to be lodged only on the following day, thereby raising questions about the genuineness of the allegations.
4.
The learned Counsel also refers to an affidavit sworn by the first informant, wherein it is stated in unequivocal terms that the applicant did not assault the informant. 5.
On the other hand, the learned APP submits that the applicant, along with the co-accused, participated in the assault on the informant. The co-accused assaulted the informant with a metal kada. The said weapon is yet to be recovered. The learned APP, however, fairly concedes that nothing is to be
recovered or discovered from the applicant.
6.
Upon careful examination of the record, it prima facie appears that the specific allegation regarding the use of a metal kada pertains to the co-accused and not the present applicant. There is no material on record suggesting that any recovery or discovery is to be made from the applicant. The sole allegation against him is that he allegedly assaulted the informant using kicks and fist blows. Significantly, subsequent to the incident, i.e. on 1 July 2025, the applicant transferred a sum of Rs.12,000/- to the informant's bank account. Moreover, the applicant has placed on record a copy of an affidavit dated 17 July 2025, in which he has unequivocally stated that the applicant herein did not assault the informant during the said incident and that he harbours no ill-will or grievance against the informant.
7.
In view of the aforementioned circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant by granting anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed on the following terms:
ORDER
(i) In the event of the applicant's arrest in C.R. No.550 of 2025, registered at
Samta Nagar Police Station, 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 shall attend the concerned Police Station on 11, 12 and 13 August 2025 between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., and cooperate with the investigation.
(iii) The applicant, either himself or through any other person, shall not indulge in any activities that may lead to evidence tampering or witness influence.
8.
The application stands disposed of accordingly. (R.N. Laddha, J.)