Bombay High Court
MANGESH BAJIRAO KHALSE AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, ordering release on bail with a personal bond and sureties, and held that custodial interrogation was not required.
Summary
The applicants, Mangesh Bajirao Khalse and Deepak Chandrakant Rakshe, sought anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 104 of 2026, alleged to involve assault, attempted murder, and theft under Sections 309(6), 311 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that on 3 February 2026 the applicants attacked a complainant and his friend, stole a gold chain and a mobile phone, and used a fighter and iron rod. The applicants argued that there was a four‑day delay in lodging the complaint and that they have no prior criminal record, so custodial interrogation was unnecessary. The State contended that the seriousness of the offences required interrogation to recover the stolen items. The Court, noting the delay and lack of antecedents, held that custodial interrogation was not required and granted anticipatory bail on condition of a Rs.30,000 personal bond and sureties, directing the applicants to cooperate with police as required, and clarified that the trial court would decide the case on its merits.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether custodial interrogation is necessary given the four‑day delay in filing the complaint.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 309(6), 311, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- custodial interrogation
- delay in complaint
- assault
- theft
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
18-ABA-1046-2026 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1046 OF 2026
1. Mangesh Bajirao Khalse
2. Deepak Chandrakant Rakshe … Applicants
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra … Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
SONALI by
Digitally signed
SONALI
Mr. Aniket Vagal a/w. Ms. Savvy Kolhekar and Ms. Juhi Kadu, Advocate
SATISH KILAJE
SATISH Date:
2026.06.29 for Applicants.
KILAJE +0700
17:02:14
Mr. B. B. Kulkarni, APP for the Respondent-State.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 25th JUNE, 2026.
P.C. :
1. The applicants are apprehending arrest in Crime No. 104 of
2026 registered with Nashik Road Police Station, for the offences
punishable under Sections 309(6), 311, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (for short “BNS Act”).
2. It is prosecution’s case that on 03.02.2026, applicants and co-
accused assaulted the first informant and his friend with fighter, iron rod,
fist and kick blows and snatched their gold chain and mobile phone.
3. It is contention of learned counsel for the applicants that there
is a delay of four days in lodging the complaint. Initially, applicants lodged
a complaint against the first informant and thereafter, to counter it, the
present complaint is filed. Applicants have no antecedents. Considering
Page 1 of 3
18-ABA-1046-2026 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
this fact, their custodial interrogation is not required and requested to
allow the application.
4. It is contention of learned APP that applicants assaulted the first
informant and his friend with intention to kill them. They snatched their
gold chain and mobile phone. Hence their custodial interrogation is
required to recover the gold chain, mobile phone and the weapons used in
the crime and requested to reject the application.
5. I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused FIR and
documents produced on record. It appears from record that initially, the
applicants lodged a complaint against the first informant. Thereafter, the
present complaint was lodged by the first informant. There is a delay of
four days in lodging the complaint. Considering this fact, custodial
interrogation of the applicants is not required and I pass following order.
ORDER
i. In the event of his arrest in connection with investigation of
Crime No. 104 of 2026 registered with Nashik Road Police
Station, the applicants shall be released on bail on executing a
P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each, with one or two
solvent sureties in the like amount.
ii. The applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and
when required.
Page 2 of 3
18-ABA-1046-2026 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
iii. It is made clear that the above observations are made only for
the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide
the case on its own merits in accordance with law and
uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.
6. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
7. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…