Rahul Vijayshankar Yadav v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2827 OF 2025 Rahul V. Yadav ...Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent.

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

Adv. V.B. Ghorpade for the Applicant.

Mr. P.H. Gaikwad, APP for the Respondent/State. PSI D. V. Kadu, Mankhurd Police Station is present ..............

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

13.10.2025.

P.C. :

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.200 of 2025 registered at Mankhurd Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 351(3), and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 4 and 25 of Arms Act and Section 37(1)(a) read with 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that on the date of incident, which took place on 4th April 2025 at about 11.30 pm, the present applicant and other co-accused assaulted the first informant with a sword and attempted to commit his murder, on account of previous enmity. The first informant sustained grievous injuries on his left hand.

1/3

4.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent / State. 5.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged assault by sword is not attributed to the present applicant. It is submitted that the applicant has nothing to do with the alleged act committed by the co-accused. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that nothing is to be recovered at the instance of applicant and therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation.

6.

On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State submits that the applicant assaulted the first informant with fist blows. It is submitted that the applicant is involved in 7 more crimes and some of the crimes are bodily offences. It is submitted that considering the said fact the applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.

7.

I have perused the FIR. Prima facie, it appears that the applicant has nothing to do with the alleged incident in which the first informant was allegedly assaulted with a sword. Nothing is to be recovered at the instance of the applicant and therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation. Considering overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail on certain conditions. In the result the following order is passed.

2/3

ORDER

A) The Application is allowed.

B) In the event of arrest of the applicant in C.R. No.200 of 2025 registered at Mankhurd Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 4 and 25 of Arms Act and Section 37(1)(a) read with 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, he be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety or two sureties in the like amount.

C) The applicant shall not enter into the jurisdiction of the following police stations till conclusion of trial. i) Trombay Police Station ii) R.C.F. Police Station iii) Mankhurd Police Station iv) Devnar Police Station v) Shivaji Nagar Police Station vi) Govandi Police Station vii) Tilaknagar Police Station.

viii) Nehrunagar Police Station ix) Chembur Police Station D] The applicant shall not commit any other crime. E] The State is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail if the applicant commits breach of any of the above conditions.

[N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3