Bombay High Court
LAVESH SHANKAR NAKATEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
The Court held that, given the applicant's lack of authority to issue passes and his cooperation with the investigation, anticipatory bail should be granted subject to standard conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Vasant Anandrao Idhol, a peon in the Maharashtra Vidhan Bhawan, was named in FIR No.91 of 2026 for allegedly handling a blank entry pass that was misused, attracting charges under Sections 319, 336, 337, 339, 340, 204 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He filed an anticipatory bail application, asserting that he had no authority to issue passes and had cooperated with the investigation, even attending the police station as per an interim protection order. The State opposed the bail, contending that the applicant had played a role in the alleged offence. The Court examined the FIR, the applicant's role, and the fact that other accused had been released on regular bail, concluding that custody was unnecessary. Accordingly, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a personal bond of Rs.25,000, a surety, and conditions of cooperation. The order directed the applicant to continue assisting the investigating agency and to appear when summoned.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant accused of handling a blank entry pass under the specified sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the applicant's lack of authority to issue passes and his cooperation with the investigation justify release on bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 204, 319, 336, 337, 339, 340, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- blank entry pass
- cooperation with investigation
- peon
- Maharashtra Vidhan Bhawan
Judgment
923-aba1705-26.doc
vai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
VASANT
ANANDRAO
IDHOL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1705 OF 2026
Digitally signed
by VASANT Lavesh Shankar Nikate ...Applicant
ANANDRAO
IDHOL V/s.
Date: State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
2026.09.17
19:09:30 +0530
Ms.Snehal Thorat for the Applicant.
Mr.Bapu V. Holambe Patil, APP for the Respondent – State.
Ms.Pooja Gagare, PSI, Marine Drive Police Station, Mumbai is
present in Court.
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant as well as learned APP
for respondent.
2. The applicant has filed the instant application seeking pre-
arrest bail in connection with FIR No.91 of 2026 for the offence
punishable under Sections 319, 336, 337, 339, 340, 204 read with
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
3. The FIR came to be registered on the basis of the report
lodged by the Security Officer of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly
alleging that a blank entry pass came to be issued in favour of one
1/3
923-aba1705-26.doc
Mr.Dattatraya Gunjal and the accused persons have facilitated to
supply the blank pass to the said person. This applicant who was
working as peon is arraigned as accused along with several other
persons.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant
was working as Peon in Maharashtra Vidhan Bhawan and had no
authority to issue any kind of pass to anybody. He submits that the
only role attributed to this applicant is handling the blank pass, which
was ultimately used by the said person.
5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant
has already expressed readiness to join in the investigation and
accordingly, in accordance with the interim protection order dated 3 rd
July, 2026, he has attended the Police Station. Learned counsel for
applicant submits that the other accused have been released on
regular bail and therefore the custody of this applicant is not
necessary.
6. The application is opposed by the learned APP by
submitting that the applicant has played some role in the offence of
issuing blank passes as stated in the FIR. However, there is no dispute
that the applicant is presently working as Peon and he has attended
the Police Station in accordance with the interim protection order.
7. Having perused the FIR and the documents placed on
record, it has to be noted that the applicant is working as Peon in
Maharashtra Vidhan Bhawan, Mumbai. Undisputedly the applicant
2/3
923-aba1705-26.doc
had no authority to issue any kind of entry passes. Considering the
fact that the applicant has attended the Police Station and has also
extended co-operation in the investigation by attending the Police
Station as per interim protection order dated 3 rd July, 2026, the
instant application needs to be allowed subject to certain conditions.
8. Hence I pass the following order :-
ORDER:
a). The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
b). In the event of arrest of the applicant in Crime No. 91
of 2026 for the offence punishable under Sections 319, 336,
337, 339, 340, 204 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), he be released on bail on furnishing
P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like
amount.
c). The applicant shall extend co-operation during
the investigation and trial.
d). The applicant shall attend the Investigating
Agency as and when called upon.
9. The application is allowed in above terms.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
3/3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.