Bombay High Court

RITESH RADHAKRISHNA GAIKWADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, finding insufficient evidence of the applicant's direct involvement and a likelihood of over‑implication.

Summary

Ritesh RadhaKrishna Gaikwad applied for anticipatory bail in connection with an assault case (Crime No. 345 of 2026) under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The FIR alleged he assaulted the informant with an iron rod, causing a fracture, while a co‑accused used a brick. The applicant argued he is a student, a counter‑report was filed, and there was a two‑day delay in lodging the FIR, suggesting possible over‑implication. The State highlighted CCTV footage showing the applicant and co‑accused at the scene, though the footage did not show the applicant using a weapon. The court, noting the lack of visual evidence of weapon use by the applicant and the delay, held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary and granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite CCTV evidence and statements implicating the applicant.
Whether the two‑day delay in filing the FIR and the counter‑report raise a reasonable doubt of over‑implication.
Whether custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary under the circumstances.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 351(2), 352

Subjects

anticipatory bail
over‑implication
delay in FIR
CCTV evidence
assault
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
bail conditions

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43671

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

22 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1132 OF 2026

RITESH RADHAKRISHNA GAIKWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Mr. Mazhar A. Jahagirdar Shaikh, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. B. Jadhav, APP for the Respondent/State

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATED : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2026

PER COURT :-

1. Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 345 of

2026, registered with Shrirampur City Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for

the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 189(2), 190,

191(2), 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

2. First Information Report shows occurrence of the incident on

06.05.2026 at about 12.30 p.m., in which the Informant is said to have been

assaulted by the present Applicant with an iron rod on his knee, resulting in a

fracture injury. There is an allegation against the co-accused of using a brick

in order to assault the Informant.

3. Learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is a

student and that there is a counter report in respect of the said incident. He

22 ABA 1132.2026.odt 1 of 3
also submits that there is a delay of two days in lodging the report, which

creates a possibility of over-implication, and the role attributed to the

Applicant is exaggerated.

4. Learned APP opposed the grant of protection to the Applicant by

referring to the statements recorded during the course of investigation. He

drew attention of the Court to the transcript of the CCTV footage, which

shows the involvement of the Applicant and the co-accused in the said assault

on the Informant.

5. Prima facie, it shows that there is a counter report lodged in respect of

the same incident. Though statements of witnesses are recorded, the

transcript of the CCTV footage does not show the Applicant using any weapon

to assault the Informant, whereas the co-accused is shown using a brick to

assault the Informant. There is a delay of two days in lodging the report and,

hence, this Court finds substance in the contention of the learned Advocate

for the Applicant that this could be a case of over-implication. Since no

weapon is seen to have been used by the Applicant, custodial interrogation of

the Applicant is not necessary. Hence, the following order.

ORDER

(i) Application is allowed.

(ii) In the event of arrest of Applicant in connection with

22 ABA 1132.2026.odt 2 of 3
Crime No. 345 of 2026, registered with Shrirampur City Police
Station, District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable
under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2),
351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, he shall be
released on bail on furnishing PR Bond of Rs.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the
like amount.

(iii) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly.

(iv) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner
whatsoever.

(v) He further directed to cooperate the investigating
agency for further investigation.

(vi) The Applicant is directed to appear before the
Investigating Officer on 01.10.2026 between 11.00 a.m. to
1.00 p.m. and as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

6. Learned APP for the Respondent/State to communicate this order to
the concerned Police Station.

( R. M. JOSHI, J.)
ssp

22 ABA 1132.2026.odt 3 of 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…