Bhavesh Ranjeet Ravalkar v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3393 OF 2025 Bhavesh Ranjeet Ravalkar ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Rupesh Atul Zade, for the Applicant.

Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent-State. Mr. Nagnath G. Patil, API, attached to Wadgaon Nimbalkar Police Station, Pune, present.

CORAM:

MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATED :

10th DECEMBER 2025 PC:- 1.

Heard Mr. Zade, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant 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 seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.80 of 2025 registered with Wadgaon Nimbalkar Police Station, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(2), 118(1), 126(2), 115(2), 189(2), 189(4), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ("BNS") and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959.

3.

The prosecution case is set out in paragraph No.4 of the order dated 18th November 2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, District- Pune in Criminal Bail Application No.830 of 2025, which reads as under:

"4. Complainant-Sanket Rajendra Shewale lodged a report at Wadgaon Nimbalkar Police Station on 09.03.2025, that on 08.03.2025, at about 8.00 p.m., he alongwith his friends Samir Sadashiv Ranware and Shubham Anant Jadhav had been to dinner at Jai Bhawani Hotel on motorcycle. After dinner, they proceeded towards Sakharwadi. Shubham was riding motorcycle, on which, he and Samir were pillion riders. When they reached in front of Someshwar Factory gate, accused Rutik alias Kalya Ravalkar and present accused-Bhavesh Ravalkar riding on motorcycle, attempted to dash the motorcycle ridden by complainant. Accused being habitual offenders, complainant did not pay any heed towards them. When he reached near Waghalwadi canal, Rutik and present accused stopped motorcycle. They both were holding iron pipes.

Accused Rutik uttering that they are habitual offenders, called someone and asked to reach at the spot with material. Accused Rutik slapped complainant and hit iron rod on his thigh. At that time, accused Pramod Jagtap came with iron sickle, accused-Sonu Navale came holding iron pipe, accused Pankaj Patil was also holding iron pipe, accused Ranjeet Ravalkar was holding wooden log, and they created terror on the spot and abused complainant with his friends. Accused Pramod Jagtap threatened Yogesh to kill and assaulted by sickle with intent to kill Yogesh on his head, which he avoided and the blow fell on his chin. Ranjeet Ravalkar hit the wooden log on the back of Shubham. Present accusedBhavesh hit iron pipe on the back and thigh of Yogesh.

left hand, due to which, left hand thumb of Shubham got fractured. Present accused and Rutik beat complainant and Yogesh with fist and kick blows as well as with iron pipes. They all threatened complainant and his friends to kill them. Complainant and his friends were frightened and left the spot. The incident took place under the street light of Waghalwadi canal. As Yogesh sustained grievous injury, blood was oozing from wound. Complainant admitted him in Sai Seva Hospital, Waghalwadi for treatment, and from there, complainant went to lodge the complaint. On such report, FIR was registered and investigation was made from the apprehended accused, against whom charge-sheet is already filed. Investigation is sought to be made from present accused by taking him into custody."

4.

It is the submission of Mr. Zade, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant that the Applicant is not involved in the crime and the incident has taken place on a spur of moment and there was no intention to commit the crime. Therefore, he submits that the Applicant be granted pre-arrest bail.

5.

On the other hand, Ms. Yadav, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State strongly opposes the Anticipatory Bail Application. She submits that the offence is very serious. The Applicant is a habitual offender and there are two offences registered against the Applicant in the year 2024 in serious crimes. She further submits that there are total six accused, except the Applicant, all have been arrested and released on regular bail and the chargesheet is

filed against them. She submits that in the chargesheet it is specifically stated that the Applicant is absconding and therefore, the chargesheet is filed against the Applicant under Section 193 of BNSS. She submits that the Applicant has breached the order granting regular bail in C.R. No.408 of 2024. She submits that the Applicant is absconding and not available for the investigation. Therefore, she submits that the Anticipatory Bail Application be rejected.

6.

Perusal of the record shows that the offence is very serious where the injured has suffered grievous injuries. The Applicant has assaulted the injured with iron rod. There are two antecedents against the Applicant as per the following details: C.R. No.

Sections Name of the Police Station 268/2024 324, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Wadgaon Nimbalkar, Pune 408/2024 118(2), 115, 352, 351(2) (3) and u/sec. 3(2) of the Prevention of Atrocities (SC and ST) Act.

Wadgaon Nimbalkar, Pune 7.

The Supreme Court in the case of Lavesh vs. State (NCT of Delhi)1 has held if the Accused is absconding and not available for (2012) 8 SCC 730

investigation then such a person is not entitled for extraordinary remedy of anticipatory bail.

8.

Accordingly, no case is made out for grant of pre-arrest bail. 9.

The Anticipatory Bail Application is dismissed. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]