Bombay High Court
SACHIN GAUTAM MATRE AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants, holding that custody was not necessary given the cross‑complaints and lack of premeditation.
Summary
The applicants, Sachin Gautam Matre and Lakhan Gautam Matre, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a FIR arising from a family dispute over water from a pipeline, which led to mutual complaints and alleged assault. The complainant alleged grievous hurt, while the police officer indicated that due to cross‑complaints custody was unnecessary and no recovery was required. The court examined the nature of the altercation, noting the lack of premeditation and the existence of reciprocal complaints. It concluded that the applicants did not pose a flight risk or threat to the investigation. Consequently, the court ordered the release of the applicants on bail with a personal bond and sureties, and directed them to report to the investigating officer as required. The anticipatory bail application was thereby disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants given the cross‑complaints and alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
- Whether custody is necessary for the investigation of the alleged offences.
- Whether any monetary or other recovery is required from the applicants under the cited sections.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- cross complaints
- water dispute
- non‑premeditated assault
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- bail conditions
Judgment
26. ABA 1372-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1372 OF 2026
1. Mr. Sachin Gautam Matre )
2. Lakhan Gautam Matre )… Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra )... Respondent
-----
Mr. Prashant S. Hagare for the Applicants.
Ms. Rashmi Tendulkar, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
Mr. Rupesh Zade for the Complainant.
Mr. Navnath S. Bhagvat, Police Constable, Daund Police Station, Pune
Rural, present.
-----
CORAM : SANDESH D. PATIL, J.
DATE : 20th MAY 2026
(VACATION COURT)
P.C. :
1) Pre-arrest bail is sought for in connection with C.R. No.198
of 2026, registered with Daund Police Station, Tal. Daund, Dist. Pune,
for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 118(1),
351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
2) Mr. Prashant Hagare, learned Counsel appearing for the
Applicants submits that the case of the complainant is that on 30 th
March, 2026 at 05.30 p.m. he was sitting in front of the house, at that
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 1/4
26. ABA 1372-2026.doc
time, the accused, who is the cousin brother in law of the complainant
came there and started abusing her. The fight was regarding taking
water through the pipeline. He submits there was a fight between two
families, as a result of which, cross complaints were lodged against
each other. He has invited my attention to the FIR. The contention is
that nothing is to be recovered at his instance. He further submits that
the other co-accused, Pranita and Chhaya granted interim protection
by this Court.
3) Mr. Rupesh Zade, the learned Counsel appearing for the
Complainant submits that the role of the accused is revealed clearly
from the FIR. He submits that prima facie case is made out against the
Applicant. He submits that custodial interrogation is necessary, because
the Applicants have caused grievous hurt to the present complainant.
He submits that no relief be granted to the present Applicant.
4) Ms. Rashmi Tendulkar, the learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-
State, on instructions of the Officer present, submits that when
Anticipatory Bail Application No.1312 of 2026 of the co-accused was
listed before this Court on 15th May, 2026, the Officer fairly stated that
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 2/4
26. ABA 1372-2026.doc
since there are cross complaints between the Applicants and the
complainant, therefore, custody is not necessary. He also added that
there is nothing to be recovered at the hands of the present Applicant.
5) Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties. The present
dispute arose over as a result of fight over water from the pipeline. The
parties are related to each other. There are cross cases. Nothing is to
be recovered from the Applicants. It appears that fight was not
premeditated. In the circumstances, the following Order is passed.
:ORDER:
(i) In the event of arrest, the Applicants-Sachin Gautam
Matre and Lakhan Gautam Matre, be released on bail
in connection with C.R. 198/2026, registered with
Daund Police Station, Tal. Daund, Dist. Pune, for the
offences punishable u/s 115(2), 117(2), 118(1),
351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023, on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- each, with one or two sureties in the like
amount.
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 3/4
26. ABA 1372-2026.doc
(ii) The Applicants shall report to the Investing Officer of
the concerned Police Station on 23 rd May, 2026 to
26th May, 2026 from 10.00 a.m. to 01.00 p.m. and,
thereafter, as and when called for.
(iii) Accordingly, Anticipatory Bail Application No.1372
of 2026 is disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 4/4
Digitally signed
RAJESH by RAJESH
VASANT
VASANT CHITTEWAN
CHITTEWAN Date: 2026.05.22
19:22:13 +0530
Checking your session…