Bombay High Court
SAGAR LAXMAN VALVIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, confirming the interim protection, subject to the condition that the applicant not contact the complainant or her son during the trial.
Summary
The applicant, Sagar Laxman Valvi, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 108, 352, 62 and 356(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The FIR alleged that he threatened the complainant's son, leading to a suicide attempt, but the son is alive, raising doubt about the applicability of Section 108 (abetment to suicide). The applicant argued that there was no proximate link between his alleged threats and the suicide attempt and that his arrest would harm his career. The State conceded the son’s survival and noted that the lower court had erroneously recorded his death. The High Court, having previously granted interim protection, confirmed that order and allowed anticipatory bail, imposing a condition that the applicant not contact the complainant or her son during trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the facts alleged in the FIR constitute an offence under Section 108 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (abetment to suicide).
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in the present circumstances.
- Whether the interim protection order previously granted should be confirmed.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 108, 352, 356(2), 62
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- abetment to suicide
- interim protection
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
31-ABA-1511-2026.doc
vaishnavi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1511 OF 2026
Sagar Laxman Valvi ...Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr. Suyash N. Khose, for the Applicant.
Mr.Amit K. Munde, APP for the Respondent – State.
Mr. Mayur Shevale, PSI, Mr. Umesh Khirad, Ganeshpuri Police
Station, Bhiwandi, Dist. Thane, is present.
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant as well as learned APP
for respondent.
2. The Applicant is apprehending arrest in Crime No. 189 of
2026 dated 18.04.2026, registered with Ganeshpuri Police Station,
Thane Rural, Dist. Thane, for the offence punishable under Sections
108, 352, 62 and 356(2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short,
“BNS”).
3. The Applicant has filed instant application under Section
1/3
31-ABA-1511-2026.doc
482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNSS").
4. The FIR is registered on the basis of report lodged by the
complainant alleging that this applicant has threatened her son that
he will kill him for his failure to return the excess amount which is
received by him in his bank account. It is alleged in the report that this
applicant and son of the complainant were working in the same
company and on account of the threats given by this applicant, which
caused humiliation, the son of complainant has consumed poison. It is
alleged that although the health of the son of the complainant is
stable, on account of the threats given by this applicant he has
attempted to commit suicide. On the basis of these allegations, the
offence is registered against this applicant.
5. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that although
the offence is registered under Section 108 of BNS, it is an undisputed
fact that the son of the complainant by name Aniket Tare is alive and
therefore, the Applicant cannot be implicated in the offence of
abetment to suicide.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that, even
the allegations as made in the FIR about threats do not demonstrate
any proximity with the alleged attempt to suicide, on the part of the
son of the complainant. It is further submitted that the applicant is in
service and working on the post of Area Manager in a Private
2/3
31-ABA-1511-2026.doc
Company and his arrest would have adverse consequences on his
career.
7. Learned APP for the Respondent does not dispute the fact
that son of the complainant Mr. Aniket Tare is alive and it is also
pointed out that the Sessions Court has wrongly recorded in its order
while rejecting bail application that the said person has died.
6. It is pointed out that considering the allegations in FIR and
the above mentioned aspects, this court has granted interim protection
to the applicant by order dated 15 th June 2026 and accordingly this
applicant has attended the Police Station. It is further submitted that
investigation is completed and charge sheet is already filed.
7. Considering all these aspects and the fact that the applicant
has not misused the interim protection, the same needs to be
confirmed. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is
allowed. The interim protection granted by this court by order dated
15th June 2026 is confirmed subject to the condition that the applicant
shall not contact the complainant or her son in any manner during
pendency of the trial.
8. The application is allowed and disposed of.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
3/3
Checking your session…