Shubham Namdev More v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3239 OF 2025 Shubham Namdev More ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
Mr. Prashant Hagare a/w Ekta Patil, for the Applicant. Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent- State. Mr. Yuvraj Patil, PSI, attached to Baramati Taluka Police Station, present.
CORAM:
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED :
26th NOVEMBER 2025 PC:- 1.
Heard Mr. Prashant Hagare, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants and Ms. Yadav, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State.
2.
This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS") seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.441 of 2025 registered on 28th October 2025 with Baramati Police Station District Pune (Rural) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 308(5), 351(2),
351(3), 352 and under Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ("BNS").
3.
By order dated 12th November 2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, District Pune in Anticipatory Bail Application filed by the Applicant being Criminal Bail Application No.855 of 2025 the same has been rejected. In the said order the prosecution case is set out in Paragraph Nos. 2 to 6 which reads as under :- "2.
The allegations in the FIR are summarized as under:
In the month of October 2024, informant had gone to Hotel Samrat situated at City in Chowk, Baramati for dinner, at that time accused No.1 Neeraj was met to him. Thereat, accused No.1 gave threat to the informant saying that he is a don in Baramati City and he compelled the informant to pay his hotel bill of Rs.2,000/- on that day. He had collected mobile phone number of informant. Thereafter, accused No.1 used to meet to informant and was collecting extortion money time to time from him.
3. In the month of April-May 2025 accused No.1 met to nformant in Pencil Chowk, Baramati and told him that he, his Friend Shubham More, Bhushan Ransing are dons in Baramati City, and if informant intending to run his company at Katphal, he shall pay extortion money to them every month, otherwise they would not allow him to run his
company. He hurrled abuses and gave threats to the informant. In the month of May 2025 accused No.1 gave threats to informant by making phone call for extorting money of Rs.4,000/- said amount was paid by informant. Even thereafter, accused No. 1 and 2 were meeting to informant, time to time every month and collecting extortion money of Rs.5,000/-, Rs.10,000/- from him.
4. In the month of October-November 2025 at about 1.00 pm when the informant was proceeding towards his house from his company accused No. 1 and 2 stopped him in Pencil Chowk, Baramati, asked him to accompany with them to Hotel Amardeep and pay bill, when informant refused for the same, they gave threats to him and compelled to pay bill of Rs. 2,500/-. Even thereafter, they gave threats to the informant saying that they are dons in Baramati city, having hundreds of cases of murder registered against them and they will kill him. They assaulted informant/victim.
5. On 15/10/2025 at about 10.00 pm, when informant was proceeding to his house from his company, accused No. 1 and 3 were met to him and asked him to leave them through his car at Jay Mallhar Tamasha Theater. Accordingly, informant was taking them to Tamasha Theater, Jainakwadi Chowk, at that time when they reached near Vanjarwadi the car of informant was out of order. At tht time they uttered abuses to the informant, gave threats to him and asked him to pay Rs.20,000/-. Accused No.3 asked informant that he shall pay Rs.20,000/- otherwise he will kill him, due to such threat he paid Rs. 20,000/- on scanner shown by accused No.3, the said amount was sent in the account of brother of accused No.3. Even thereafter, both accused No. 1 and 3 threatened informant and told him that, he shall state that he is repaying handloan obtained from accused No. 1 and 3. Accordingly, informant stated those words, accused
No. 1 and 3 took video shooting of said talk of informant.
6. On 18/10/2025 at about 10.00 pm, informant had been to Hotel Amardeep for taking his worker, at that time accused No. 1 and 2 called him in Hotel Amardeep and asked him to pay their hotel bill and also pay them Rs.13,000/-. He refused for the same on which accused No.1 used criminal force against informant for assaulting him by means of bottle. Thus, all the accused No. 1 to 3 time to time extorted money from the informant under threat to kill him and assaulting him by hurrling abuses to him. On report lodged by informant, above referred FIR has been registered against the accused No.1 to 3."
4.
It is the submission of Mr. Prashant Hagare, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant that the Applicant is not involved in the crime. He submits that, although, the allegation against him is that he has extorted money from the First Informant by giving threat, even, as per the prosecution case nothing has been received by him. He submits that there is delay in lodging the FIR. He submits that except Section 308(5) of the BNS the other Sections are bailable and triable.
5.
On the other hand, Ms. Yadav, learned APP strongly opposes the Anticipatory Bail Application. She submits that the Applicant was present when the crime took place and his presence was
captured by CCTV. She submits that the Applicant is involved in a very serious crime. She submits that there are 6 antecedents. Therefore, the Anticipatory Bail Application be rejected. 6.
Mr. Prashant Hagare, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that although there are 6 antecedents all are mentioned in the Anticipatory Bail Application and last offence is of the year 2019. He submits that in all the offences he has been granted bail.
7.
Perusal of the record shows that although, the offence is very serious and as per the FIR the Applicant is involved in the crime, however, even as per the prosecution case, the Applicant has not received any amount. Although, the Applicant is seen in the CCTV footage in the hotel which is referred in the FIR, he was sitting at a different table than where the main Accused i.e. Accused No.1 was sitting along with First Informant and it is seen that for a brief period he went to that table. Although, there are 6 antecedents they are of the period between 2015 to 2019. Thereafter, except the present crime there is no other crime registered against the Applicant.
8.
Thus, although, case is made out for granting Anticipatory Bail stringent conditions are required to be imposed as there are 6 earlier antecedents registered either with Baramati Taluka or Baramati Police Station.
9.
Mr. Hagare, learned Counsel for the Applicant, on instructions, submits that the Applicant will not stay in Pune District and will stay alongwith his relative at Karad, District - Satara i.e. at the residence of Sonam Ashok Kamble, Vasundhara Colony, Malkapur Naka, Karad, Satara.
10.
Accordingly, the following order is passed:
O R D E R
(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant- Shubham Namdev More in connection with C.R. No.441 of 2025 registered with Baramati Police Station, District Pune (Rural), the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.
(b) The Applicant shall attend the Baramati Police Station, Pune (Rural) on 27th November 2025 between 11:00 a.m. to 04:00 p.m. and thereafter as and when called by Investigating Officer till filing of the Charge-sheet and shall cooperate with the investigation.
(c) The Applicant shall attend the Karad Police Station, District-Satara, once in a week i.e. on every Sunday between 11:00 a.m. to 01:00 p.m. till the conclusion of the trial. The Inspector of Karad Police Station to intimate the details of the same to the Investigating Officer.
(d) 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.
(e) 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.
(f) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner.
(g) The Applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.
11.
The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]