Bombay High Court
SUMIT SUNIL BHALERAOversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The anticipatory bail applications are allowed.
Summary
The applicants, Sumit Sunil Bhalerao and Sagar Anil Tayade, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in connection with FIR No. 91/2026 alleging assault with weapons under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Maharashtra Police Act. They argued that a counter‑report and CCTV footage show the informant’s son as the aggressor, suggesting possible false implication. The State opposed bail, citing five antecedents against Sagar and alleging injuries caused by the applicants. The court examined the counter‑report, investigation papers, and CCTV evidence, finding that the injuries were simple and that the son of the informant initiated the assault, leaving room for false implication. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail to both applicants with conditions including a personal bond, attendance at the police station, and non‑interference with witnesses or evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants despite the serious offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Maharashtra Police Act.
- Whether the presence of counter‑reports and CCTV evidence indicating possible false implication warrants bail.
- Whether the nature and severity of the alleged injuries justify denial of pre‑arrest bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 189(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352
- Maharashtra Police Act — s. 37(1)(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- assault
- CCTV evidence
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Maharashtra Police Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37203
925-ABA-1223-2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1223 OF 2026
Sumit Sunil Bhalerao
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1229 OF 2026
Sagar Anil Tayade
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
…
Mr. V. B. Patil, Advocate for Applicant
Mrs. P. J. Bharad, APP for the Respondent – State
...
CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J
DATE : AUGUST 19, 2026
P. C. :
1. Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with C.R. No.
91/2026 registered with Police Station Yawal, District Jalgaon for the
offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 189(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3),
118(1), 115(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections
37(1)(c) of the Maharashtra Police Act.
2. First information report indicates that an incident had occurred
on 28.03.2026 at about 08.00 pm in which present Applicants and co-
accused came to the spot of incident with weapons in their hands and
caused assault to the Informant and witnesses. There is allegation against
Page 1 of 4
925-ABA-1223-2026.odt
present Applicants that Applicant – Sumit caused assault with iron rod on
the Informant and Applicant – Sagar assaulted witness Tushar.
3. Learned Counsel for the Applicants submits that as appear from
the first information report itself, there are disputes between the parties
owing to the complaints made on the Applicants’ side against Informant’s
son. It is his submission that there is counter report lodged in respect of said
incident, which indicates that the informant’s side was aggressor in the
assault caused on the Applicants’ and others. It is his submission that during
the course of investigation, CCTV footage of the incident has been obtained,
which indicates that the son of the Informant was in fact assailant and
hence, the possibility of the false/over implication is not ruled out.
4. Learned APP opposed grant of any protection to the Applicants
firstly by submitting that against Applicant – Sagar five antecedents. She
also drew attention of the Court to the investigation papers, which
according to her, indicates that injury was caused to Tushar, which is
attributable to the Sagar. It is claimed that having regard to the nature of
offences and the disputes between the parties, this is not the case of pre-
arrest bail to these Applicants.
5. Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that in respect of the
incident occurred on 28.03.2026, counter reports are lodged. Perusal of the
investigation papers, more particularly, the CCTV footage
Page 2 of 4
925-ABA-1223-2026.odt
panchnama/transcript indicates that the son of the informant Tushar in fact
has commenced the assault. In the light of these facts, injury caused to the
said Tushar is simple in nature. Though there is allegation against Applicant
– Sumit of he causing assault with iron rod, injury caused to the Informant
is simple in nature. There is no specific attribution against Applicant Sumit
of causing any particular injury to any witness, which is grievous in nature.
6. Having regard to the aforestated facts, the possibility of false
implication is not ruled out. Appropriation directions to the Applicants to
appear before the investigating officer will meet the purpose of
investigation. Hence, the order:
ORDER
(i) Anticipatory Bail Applications are allowed.
(ii) In the event of arrest of the Applicants in connection with
C.R. No. 91/2026 registered with Police Station Yawal,
District Jalgaon for the offences punishable under Sections
109(1), 189(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 115(2), 352 of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 37(1)(c) of
the Maharashtra Police Act, they shall be released on bail on
furnishing PR bond of Rs. 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand
Only) each with one surety in the like amount.
(iii) They shall attend the concerned police station 27.08.2026
and 29.08.2026 between 11.00 am to 01.00 pm and
thereafter upon written notice by the IO.
(iv) They shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly.
(v) They shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner
Page 3 of 4
925-ABA-1223-2026.odt
whatsoever.
(vi) They are further directed to cooperate the investigating
agency for further investigation, remained if any.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Malani
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…