Saurabh Santosh Vartak Alias Bachkana v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2290 OF 2025 Saurabh Santosh Vartak alias Bachkana ...Applicant

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

....

Mr. Ashish Shukla, a/w Mr. P. Shukla, Mr. L. S. Shukla, Mr. Shubham Dubey, Mr. Aman Singh, Ms. Arusha Mishra, Advocate for the Applicant.

Mr. B. V. Holambe Patil A.P.P. for the Respondent - State. ....

CORAM

:

N. R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

16.092025.

P.C.

:

1.

This is an application for Anticipatory Bail. 2.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 403 of 2025 registered at Kapurbawadi Police Station Dist- Thane, for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(3), 352, 351(2) and 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, Sections 37(1) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, and Sections 3 and 7 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act.

3.

According to the prosecution, on the date of the incident, which took place on 10.05.2025, the present applicant and other co-accused came to the house of the first informant armed with sharp weapons and started abusing her husband and his brothers. They threatened to kill them. It is alleged that with a view to terrorise them, they broke water pipeline of their house.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-state. 5.

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a social worker and implicated in the crime in question due to previous enmity. It is submitted that Koyta is already recovered, and therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation.

6.

On the other hand, the learned APP for the respondent-State submits that the applicant is involved in 13 more crimes including the crimes for the offences punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned APP submits that considering the nature of crime, the applicant may not be released on bail. 7.

I have perused the First Information Report. At the time of alleged incident the present applicant was armed with Koyta. Considering the said fact and as the applicant is involved in 13 more crimes of serious nature, I am not inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. The Anticipatory Bail Application is rejected. (N. R. BORKAR, J.)