Sujit Mahendra Singh v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2697 OF 2025 Sujit Mahendra Singh ...Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Krishna Singh, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. V. N. Sagare, APP for the Respondent/State.

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

01.10.2025.

P.C. :

1.

This is an application for Anticipatory Bail. 2.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 191 of 2025 registered at Charkop Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 127(2), 140(3), 351(2), 352, 308(5), & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and Section 32 of the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that the first informant was in need of financial assistance for his business. As such, his friend introduced him to the present applicant. On 23.12.2023, the first informant borrowed Rs.1,00,000/- from the applicant with 20 1/4

percent interest thereon. Thereafter, upon failure of the first first informant to pay the said interest amount, the applicant demanded Rs.12,00,000/- from him. On 14.09.2024, the present applicant and other co-accused abducted the first informant and threatened to kill him if he did not pay them Rs.1,00,000/-. Accordingly, the first informant paid them Rs.40,000/- after which he was released. Subsequently, the applicant and other coaccused persistently demanded more money from the first informant and threatened him with dire consequences. Resultantly, the present crime was registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the first informant.

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 and the first informant were partners. It is submitted that a dispute arose between them on account of certain financial transactions. Therefore, a false FIR came to be lodged against the applicant. It is submitted that there is a delay in lodging the first information report. It is submitted that the applicant is ready to co-operate in the investigation.

2/4

6.

On the other hand, the learned APP for the respondentState submits that the applicant is a money lender. The first informant borrowed Rs.1,00,000 from the applicant. It is submitted that though the first informant had repaid an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- against the borrowed money, the applicant was threatening him and demanding more money. It is submitted that the first informant was thus abducted and forced to pay an amount of Rs.40,000/-. It is further submitted that the first informant was abducted to compel him to make the applicant partner in his business. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime the applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail. 7.

I have perused the first information report. According to the first informant, on 09.07.2024, the applicant got executed certain documents from him. Thereafter, he was abducted on 14.09.2024, still the FIR came to be lodged after one year i.e., on 10.05.2025. There are no other criminal antecedents against the applicant. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. In the result, the following order is passed :

3/4

O R D E R

a) The Application is allowed.

b) In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with Crime No. 191 of 2025 registered at Charkop Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 127(2), 140(3), 351(2), 352, 308(5), & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and Section 32 of the Maharashtra MoneyLending(Regulation) Act, the applicant be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

c) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the investigating officer and shall co-operate in the investigation.

[N.R.BORKAR, J.] 4/4