Rahul Vikas Chandorkar v. The State Of Maharashtra
by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date:
2026.04.17 20:33:15 +0530 CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Cri. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 991 of 2026 Rahul Vikas Chandorkar Aged about 38 years, Occ : Pilot, Residing at 304, Floor -Podium, Vista Tower -2-Fern, Gaimukh Gaon, Thane (West), Maharashtra - 400 615.
... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra At the instance of Borivali Police Station Through Ld Public Prosecutor, High Court, Mumbai.
... Respondent ---- Ms Mallika Ingale, for the Applicant.
Ms Manish R Tidke, APP, for the Respondent / State. PSI Suryakant Doke, Borivali Police Station, Mumbai. ---- Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 17 April 2026 P.C.:
By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.542 of 2026, registered at Borivali Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 316(2) and 352 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
The prosecution's case, in brief, is that the applicant, who
is the brother-in-law of the informant, along with the other coaccused, subjected the informant to harassment in connection with unlawful demands and ill-treatment. However, upon a careful perusal of the FIR, it emerges that the specific allegations pertaining to the demand of dowry and sustained harassment are primarily directed against the husband and other in-laws. As against the present applicant, the only allegation is that in the year 2020, he had abused and threatened the informant.
3.
The said allegation, even if taken at face value, appears to be general in nature and not indicative of continuous or proximate involvement in the alleged offence. Significantly, the FIR came to be lodged in April 2026, whereas the alleged act attributed to the applicant dates back to the year 2020. There is no satisfactory explanation for this inordinate delay, which assumes significance while considering the credibility and immediacy of the allegations against the present applicant. 4.
The learned APP, upon instructions, fairly submits that the investigation, insofar as the present applicant is concerned, stands concluded. It is further conceded that, apart from the aforesaid allegation of abuse and threat, there is no material on record connecting the applicant with the alleged offences. It is also not the case of the prosecution that any recovery or
discovery is to be effected from the applicant. 5.
The applicant has no criminal antecedents. There is nothing on record to indicate that the applicant would abscond or tamper with the prosecution evidence. The applicant has expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation. 6.
In view of the nature of allegations, the limited role attributed to the applicant, the delay in lodging the FIR, absence of material connecting the applicant with the alleged offences, and the fact that custodial interrogation is not required, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a case for the grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(i) In the event of the applicant's arrest in CR No.542 of 2026, registered at Borivali Police Station, Mumbai, the applicant shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The applicant himself or through any other person, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.
(iii) The applicant shall attend the
concerned police station as and when required by the investigating officer till filing of the charge sheet.
7.
The application stands disposed of accordingly. [R.N. Laddha, J.]