Anand Ramesh Jadhav v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3202 OF 2025 Anand Ramesh Jadhav ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Omkar Jadhav, for the Applicant.

Mr. A. R. Metkari, APP, for the Respondent-State. API, Krishna D. attached to Panvel City Police Station, present.

CORAM:

MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATED :

21st NOVEMBER 2025 PC:- 1.

Heard Mr. Omkar Jadhav, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and Mr. Metkari, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State.

2.

By this application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS") the Applicant is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.625 of 2025 registered on 19th October 2025 with Panvel City Police Station, New Mumbai for the offence punishable under Sections 37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 ("the Act") and for the offence

punishable under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ("BNS").

3.

The prosecution case is set out in Paragraph No.2 of order dated 12th November 2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel in Criminal Bail Application No.869 of 2025. The said Paragraph No.2 reads as under :-

2. In short the prosecution case is that, the informant Govind Ramchandra Rathod had rented room No.B-406, situated in Samruddhi Complex, Valap, Panvel, which stands in the name of his elder brother, Ravi Ramchandra Rathod, on heavy deposit of Rs.2,00,000/- prior to one year. As quarrel took place between the applicant and other members of the society, the applicant intended to leave the room. When he demanded deposit amount from informant, at that time informant gave him Rs.20,000/-. Further it is the case of prosecution that on 19/01/2025 at about 10.00 a.m. the informant had gone to work, at about 02.30 p.m. his nephew Darshan made phone call to him and informed him that applicant had come to his house. Thereafter informant made phone call to applicant, at that time applicant demanded his deposit amount.

The informant asked applicant to come to his office but applicant asked informant to come near Orion mall. Accordingly, informant went toward Orion mall and gave Rs.70,000/- to applicant. He gave assurance to applicant that he would give remaining amount later on. At that time applicant caught hold shirt collar of informant and hurled abuse at him. Thereafter, he inflicted blow of knife on right side of informant's stomach.

people who were passing along the road took informant to Life Line Hospital for medical treatment. The informant thereafter set the Criminal law into motion by lodging detailed report against applicant at Panvel City Police Station. On the basis of report so lodged by informant, an offence came to be registered against applicant vide C.R. No.625/2025 under above mentioned sections.

4.

It is the submission of Mr. Jadhav, learned Counsel appering for the Applicant that there are several complaints filed against the First Informant. The Applicant could get the information with respect to C.R. No.124 of 2025 registered on 29th June 2025 with Kamothe Police Station, New Mumbai against the First Informant for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of the BNS, wherein the allegation was that the said First InformantParashram Gangaram Palshetkar was cheated for an amount of Rs.21,40,900/-. He submitted that the First Informant was in custody for considerable period in that offence and chargehsheet has also been filed. He submits that the FIR lodged against the Applicant is a false FIR. He submits that in fact, the injury certificate is issued by private hospital and the First Informant was admitted only for 2 hours. He submits that Applicant has no antecedents. He submits that in fact his wife has lodged complaint inter alia against the First Informant earlier and thereafter false

FIR is lodged. He submits that Applicant will cooperate with the investigation and comply with all the terms and conditions. 5.

On the other hand Mr. Metkari, learned APP strongly opposes the Anticipatory Bail Application. He submits that the Applicant has assaulted the First Informant by knife and the injuries are grievous in nature. He therefore, submits that Anticipatory Bail Application be rejected.

6.

Perusal of the record shows that the incident has taken place on spur of the movement. The Applicant has no antecedents. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Applicant that the false FIR is filed. Perusal of the record further shows that in fact, on 14th September 2024 complaint has been lodged by the Applicant's wife and the subject CR is lodged on 19th October 2025. In any case, as the Applicant has undertaken to cooperate with the investigation, by imposing certain conditions the Anticipatory Bail can be granted.

7.

In view thereof, the following order is passed:

O R D E R

(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant- Anand Ramesh Jadhav in connection with C.R. No.625 of 2025 registered with the Panvel City Police Station, New Mumbai the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

(b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on 27th November 2025 and 28th November 2025 between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. till filing of the chargesheet and shall cooperate with the investigation. In addition, the Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when called. (c) The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto.

(d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade

such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner.

(f) The Applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

8.

The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]