Bombay High Court
Raviraj Anil JadhavversusThe State of Maharashtra
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the applicant with specified conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Raviraj Anil Jadhav under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with offences alleged under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution’s case was based on a witness statement naming the applicant, while the applicant asserted he was not involved, not a resident of the locality, and had no criminal antecedents. The court observed inconsistencies between the witness statement and the FIR and noted that the incident appeared to be spontaneous with no pre‑planning. Considering the applicant’s cooperation and lack of prior record, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to strict conditions. The order emphasized that the observations were limited to the bail application and should not influence the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the witness statement naming the applicant is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged involvement and lack of antecedents warrant arrest.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 125(b), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- witness statement
- no antecedents
- spontaneous incident
Judgment
15.ABA-1474.26.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1474 OF 2026
Raviraj Anil Jadhav … Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra …. Respondent
______________________
Mr. Ravi P. Jadhav and Ms. Jui V. Kanhere, for the Applicant.
Ms. Dhanalakshmi Krishna Iyer, APP for the respondent-State.
Mr. Santosh Mhatre, PSI and Mr. S. G. Gundale, Head Constable,
HCD attached to Kharadi Police Station, Pune City present.
______________________
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 7 SEPTEMBER 2026
P. C. :-
1. Heard Mr. Jadhav, learned Counsel appearing for the
Applicant and Ms. Iyer, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-
State.
2. By this application filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 the Applicant is seeking pre-arrest
bail in connection with C.R. No.106 of 2026 registered with
Kharadi Police Station, Pune City for the offences punishable under
Page 1
PPN
15.ABA-1474.26.DOC
Sections 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 125(b), 3(5), 351 (2) and 352
of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the First Informant – Arthav
Balasaheb Jhurune, Vipul Kandge, Abhishek Sonavane, Rutwij
Nikam, Aditya Mane, Pravin Thombare, Prathamesh Mulik,
Vaibhav Sonavane, Gaurav Aabnave and Gaurav Kondake were
playing games on mobile at the Coffee Joint Shop, CT Vista Society.
Kharadi, Kharadi, Pune. They heard loud noise from Zeniya
Society, Kharadi and, therefore, they went and they saw that 3-4
unknown persons were assaulting an unknown person and when
these persons tried to intervene, those persons threatened the First
Informant and his friends and one of them said that he is Galande
and at that time, the First Informant’s friends Abhishek Sonavane
was assaulted with beer bottle. Therefore, the offence was
registered against said Galande and 3 unknown persons.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the
Applicant that the Applicant is not at all involved in the crime. The
Applicant is not even resident of said Society. The Applicant has no
antecedents.
Page 2
PPN
15.ABA-1474.26.DOC
5. Learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State relied on a
statement of one Sahil Dhananjay Walawalkar dated 8 April 2026
recorded during the investigation wherein name of the Applicant is
reflected. Learned APP submitted that the Application be
dismissed.
6. However, perusal of the FIR and perusal of the said
statement clearly show that some different case is made in the said
Statement of witness Sahil Dhananjay Walawalkar dated 8 April
2026 and in the FIR. The said Statement is contrary to the FIR.
7. In any case, the F.I.R. as well as the said statement dated 8
April 2026 of Sahil Dhananjay Walawalkar shows that the incident
has taken place on spur of movement. There is no pre-planning
and no pre-preparation. The Applicant has no antecedents.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the Applicant submitted that
the Applicant will completely cooperate with the investigation.
9. Accordingly, case is made out for grant of Anticipatory Bail
by imposing following conditions :-
Page 3
PPN
15.ABA-1474.26.DOC
ORDER
(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant in connection
with C.R. No.106 of 2026 registered with the Kharadi
Police Station, Pune, the Applicant is directed to be
released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of
Rs.30,000/- with one or two solvent sureties each in
the like amount.
(b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police
Station on 10th and 11th September 2026 between
11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m.
(c) The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and
residential address to the Investigating Officer and
shall keep the same updated, in case of any change
thereto.
(d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat, or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or
to any Police personnel.
(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
Page 4
PPN
15.ABA-1474.26.DOC
evidence and shall not contact or influence the
Complainant or any witness in any manner.
10. The observations made in this order are only for the purpose
of considering the anticipatory bail application and the learned
Trial Court shall not be influenced by these observations.
11. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 5
PPN
Checking your session…