Manish Ramprasad Upadhyay v. The State Of Maharashtra

914-aba-2507-25.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2507 OF 2025 Manish R. Upadhyay ...Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent.

..............

Mr. Sunil Bhandare a/w. Ms Kavita Anchan for the Applicant. Mrs. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent/State. PSI P.D. Yerunkar, Shrinagar Police Station, Thane city present. ..............

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

13.11.2025.

P.C. :

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 339 of 2025 registered at Shrinagar Police Station, Dist. Thane for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) and 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

The allegations against the present applicant and other coaccused are of theft of copper wire/cable used by Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited for telecommunication services. 4.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent / State. Dinesh S. Sherla 1/2

914-aba-2507-25.doc 5.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the alleged crime. It is submitted that the FIR is against the unknown persons. It is submitted that there is no need for custodial interrogation and the applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation .

6.

On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State submits that during interrogation the co-accused has disclosed the involvement of the present applicant. It is submitted that there are Call Details Record (C.D.R) to show that the present applicant was in the contact of other co-accused. It is further submitted the mobile location of the present applicant on the alleged date of incident indicates his presence near the place of incident. Learned APP submits that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary to recover the stolen wire cable. Learned APP submits that the applicant is involved in one more crime of similar nature. 7.

I have perused the papers of investigation. Prima facie, the applicant appears to be involved in the present crime. The applicant is involved in one more crime of similar nature. Considering the said fact, I am not inclined to released the applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the Application is rejected. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] Dinesh S. Sherla 2/2