Yash Dattatraya Bandal v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3224 OF 2025 Yash D. Bandal ...Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent.

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

Mr. Ashish S. Gaikwad a/w, Mr. Anirudh Rote and Ms Prerna Agavekar and Mr. Sagar Bhoir for the Applicant. Mr. B.V. Holambe Patil, APP for the Respondent/State. PSI Deepak Paradhye, Vashi Police Station is present. ..............

CORAM

:

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

26.11.2025.

P.C. :

1.

This is an application for Anticipatory Bail. 2.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 381 of 2025 registered at Vashi Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 127(2), 140(2), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 308(5), 351(2), 352 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that on 01.07.2025 at about 1:00 p.m., the first informant along with his friends Aditya Tripathi and Zuber Khatri was at Global Gaming Cafe, Vashi. During the said time, five unknown persons arrived and after verifying the identity of the first informant abducted him. Subsequently, the first informant was taken to an abandoned building wherein he 1/3

was asked if he sells ganja in college. Further, the co-accused along with the applicant extorted sum of Rs.4,800/- from the first informant and then at about 4.30 p.m., he was allowed to go. Again on the same day at around 9:00 p.m., the co-accused reached a spot where the informant was chatting with his friends and assaulted the first informant and his friends. 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 has nothing to do with the alleged crime. It is submitted that there was some financial dispute between the first informant and the co-accused Danny. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation as nothing is to be recovered at the instance of the applicant. It is submitted that there are no other criminal antecedents against the present applicant. 6.

On the other hand, the learned APP for the respondent- State submits that during the course of investigation, the investigating officer has collected CCTV footage which shows that the present applicant was with the other co-accused at the time of abduction. 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. The FIR came to be lodged only after the incident, which took place at 9.00 p.m. 2/3

Nothing is pointed to show the involvement of applicant in the incident which took place at 9.00 p.m. The motive for alleged crime is attributed to the co-accused. Considering the said facts, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. In the result, the following order is passed :

O R D E R

a) The Application is allowed.

b) In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with Crime No. 381 of 2025 registered at Vashi Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 127(2), 140(2), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 308(5), 351(2), 352 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 cooperate in the investigation. d) The applicant shall not commit any other crime. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3