SUGANDHA SUBHASH JADHAVversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                                          927-aba1841-26.doc



      vai

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
VASANT
ANANDRAO
IDHOL                        ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1841 OF 2026

Digitally signed
by VASANT          Sugandha Subhash Jadhav                                ...Applicant
ANANDRAO
IDHOL                         V/s.
Date:              State of Maharashtra                                   ...Respondent
2026.09.17
19:09:29 +0530


                   Mr.Jayesh Rathod with Adv.Anna Maria for the Applicant.

                   Mr.Bapu V. Holambe Patil, APP for the Respondent – State.

                   Mr.Prerana Bankar, PSI, MIDC 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 instant application under Section

                   482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-

                   arrest bail in Crime No. 169 of 2026 dated 27.02.2026, registered

                   with MIDC Police Station, Brihanmumbai, for the offence punishable

                   under Sections 305(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

                   3.           Learned counsel for applicant submits that the offence is

                                                      1/4
                                                       927-aba1841-26.doc

registered against unknown persons and the name of this applicant is

not mentioned in the FIR. It is pointed out that in the report, the

complainant has only expressed suspicion of theft on account of the

fact that this applicant was the maid servant at the house of the

complainant since about eight years. Learned counsel for applicant

submits that this Court has granted interim protection by an order

dated 15th July, 2026 and accordingly the applicant has joined in the

investigation and attended the Police Station. He therefore, prays for

confirmation of the interim protection.

4.         Learned counsel for the applicant states that, the applicant

is ready to join the investigation and extend cooperation by attending

the police station whenever called upon.

5.         Learned APP has opposed the application and submitted

that there are allegations in the report that the applicant was having

an additional key of the house of the complainant. In view of the

allegations in the FIR, he submits that detailed investigation is

required to be conducted. However, there is no dispute about the

contention that the applicant has attended the Police Station in

accordance with the interim protection order dated 15th July, 2026.

6.         After perusal of the FIR and and the documents placed on

record, it is clear that the offence is registered against an unknown

                                 2/4
                                                         927-aba1841-26.doc

person. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The allegations about

theft are based on suspicion. It has to be noted that when the

applicant was working with the complainant’s family for about eight

years and she has got extra key of the house, there cannot be a

presumption that she has committed the offence of theft. As such, at

this stage, it appears that the offence is registered only on the basis of

suspicion and there is no material to show that any theft is committed

by this applicant by stealing the golden ornaments from the locker of

the complainant’s house.

7.         Considering the fact that the applicant has joined in the

investigation and attended the Police Station in accordance with the

interim protection order, custodial interrogation of this applicant is

not warranted. Accordingly, the interim protection needs to be

confirmed subject to certain conditions.

8.         Hence I pass the following order :-

                             O R D E R :-

     a).    The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

     b).   In the event of arrest of the applicant in Crime No.

     169 of 2026 dated 27.02.2026, registered with MIDC Police

     Station, Brihanmumbai, for the offence punishable under

     Sections 305(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

                                   3/4
                                                       927-aba1841-26.doc

     (BNS), she be released on bail on furnishing P. R. Bond of

     Rs.25,000/- .with one solvent surety in the like amount.

     c).   The applicant is directed to attend the Investigating

     Agency as and when called upon.

     d).   The applicant shall extend co-operation during the

     investigation and trial.

9.         The anticipatory bail application is allowed and

disposed of.



                                       (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)




                                 4/4