Sandeep Ramesh Singh v. State Of Maharashtra

922-aba-2579-25.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2579 OF 2025 Sandeep R. Singh ...Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent.

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

Adv. Prashant R. Suryawanshi i/b Adv. Gajanan M. Savagave for the Applicant.

Mr. V.N. Sagare, APP for the Respondent/State. PSI P.D. Yerunkar, Shrinagar 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. 339 of 2025 registered at Shreenagar 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

922-aba-2579-25.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 further 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 the applicant is the main accused. It is submitted that during interrogation the co-accused has revealed 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 said co-accused. It is further submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary to recover 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. Considering the said fact and as the applicant is involved in one more crime of similar nature, I am not inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the Application is rejected. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] Dinesh S. Sherla 2/2