Bombay High Court
SARFARAZUDDIN MOHAMMAD YUNUS SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant with strict conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Sarfarazuddin Mohammad Yunus Shaikh in connection with a case involving alleged theft of scrap material and sewing machines from a truck. The prosecution alleged that the applicant executed a notarized document and was present at the scene where the goods were removed, though he was not accused of demanding money or threatening the driver. The applicant argued that his name does not appear in the FIR, he has no prior record, and he is willing to cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed bail, citing CDR records and the applicant’s alleged presence at the spot. The Court found that, even if the allegations are accepted, the applicant’s role is peripheral and there are no antecedents, and therefore granted anticipatory bail subject to stringent conditions. The order directs the applicant to furnish a bond, attend police stations on specified dates, refrain from influencing witnesses, and not leave India without permission.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 BNSS, 2023 in view of the alleged involvement in the theft of scrap material and sewing machines.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged presence at the scene and execution of a notarized document constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 303(2), 308(2), 316(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- theft
- scrap material
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
908-ABA-1892-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1892 OF 2026
Sarfarazuddin Mohammad Yunus Shaikh …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Sahil Panjwani a/w. Mr. Ritik Gupta, for the Applicant.
Mr. S. S. Ghag, APP, for the Respondent-State.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 22nd SEPTEMBER 2026
PC:-
1. Heard Mr. Panjwani, learned Counsel appearing for the
Applicant and Mr. Ghag, learned APP appearing for the
Respondent-State.
2. This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”) seeking pre-arrest bail
in connection with C.R. No.135 of 2025 registered with Malegaon
Taluka Police Station, Nashik Rural, Nashik, for the offences
punishable under Sections 303(2), 308(2) and 316(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).
Page 1
Sonali
908-ABA-1892-2026.DOC
3. It is the submission of Mr. Panjwani, learned Counsel
appearing for the Applicant that the Applicant is not at all involved
in the crime. He submits that the Applicant’s name is not
mentioned in the FIR. The exact role of the Applicant is not at all
reflected in the FIR. He submits that the main accused i.e. accused
No.1-Kishor Nerkar, Headconstable, who has already been arrested
and released on regular bail. He submits that there are no other
antecedents against the Applicant. He submits that the Applicant
will co-operate with the investigation. He therefore, submits that
the Anticipatory Bail Application be allowed.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Ghag, learned APP appearing for the
Respondent-State strongly opposes the Anticipatory Bail
Application. He submits that during investigation it transpired that
certain documents have been created in the name of the present
Applicant. He submits that the accused Nos. 3 and 4 have
unloaded the said scrap material from the subject truck and loaded
the same in some other truck and removed the same from the said
place. He submits that the CDR record also shows that the present
Applicant, who is accused Nos.4 and accused No.3-Shahajad Tufel
Khan were present at the spot. He submits that the Anticipatory
Page 2
Sonali
908-ABA-1892-2026.DOC
Bail Application filed by the accused No.3-Shahajad Tufel Khan has
been rejected by a learned Single Judge. He therefore, submits that
the Anticipatory Bail Application be rejected.
5. The prosecution case is set out in paragraph Nos.7 and 8 of
the order dated 12th December 2025, passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, District-Nashik, passed in
Criminal Bail Application No.1011 of 2025, which reads as under:
“7. Copy of FIR and other police papers,
submitted for perusal, prima facie shows that
C. R. No.135 of 2025 is registered at Malegaon
Taluka Police Station, for the offence p/u/s
308(2), 303(2), 316(5) of the B.N.S. As per the
say of I.O. Section 61 (2) is added in the crime
during investigation. I have gone through the
contents of FIR. Prima facie it can be said that it
is registered on 24/02/2025 at 19.27 hours. It is
alleged that on 11/02/2025 the goods truck
containing scrap material and Sewing machines
of P.P. Metal and Goel Metal Company was being
transported from Pune to Delhi and when the
said goods truck was proceeding on 12/02/2025
on Pune to Dhule Road, at about 11.30 a.m. some
police stopped the goods truck and they made
enquiry with the driver of the goods truck
therefore, the driver made a phone call to the
father of the informant. It is alleged that as the
driver was not possessing bills of the scrap
material, the police who had stopped the vehicle
demanded Rs.20 lacs. Therefore, the father of
informant told agent Kailas Patil to go and see
what had happened, therefore, Kailas Patil went
Page 3
Sonali
908-ABA-1892-2026.DOC
at that time he saw that accused Kishor Nerkar
was there and he told that at least Rs.7 lacs
should be given for allowing to remove the goods
truck from that place.
8. In the FIR it is further alleged that the said
goods truck was held or stopped by accused
Kishor Nerkar on 12/02/2025 from 11.30 a.m. to
06.00 p.m. It is further alleged that when Kailas
Patil told accused Kishor Nerkar that the driver of
the goods truck had seen some persons had
removed some scrap material and Sewing
machines from the goods truck as per the
directions given by accused Kishor Nerkar, at that
time the accused Kishor Nerkar gave evasive
answers. It is further alleged that one Lady Police
Officer namely Smt. Savanji Madam told the
accused Kishor Nerkar to allow the driver to drive
the goods truck otherwise she would inform
about it to the Senior Officers, therefore, the
accused Kishor Nerkar called the driver and put
four Sewing machines in the goods truck and
then the driver drove the said goods truck
towards Delhi. It is further alleged that when the
goods truck was unloaded at Delhi it was noticed
that 31 bags containing scrap material and seven
Sewing machines were not in the goods truck and
except the place where the accused Kishor Nerkar
had stopped the said goods truck it was not
stopped at any place. According to the informant,
the accused Kishor Nerkar with the help of some
other persons had removed the said scrap
material and Sewing machines and committed
the theft of material worth Rs.13 lacs.”
Thus, it is clear that on 12 th February 2025, the police
stopped the subject truck on the Pune–Dhule Road on the
allegation that the driver was not in possession of the requisite
Page 4
Sonali
908-ABA-1892-2026.DOC
bills. It is further alleged that the police demanded an amount of
Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh only) and thereafter
negotiated the said amount.
6. In the said truck, scrap material and sewing machines
belonging to P.P. Metal and Goyal Metal Company were being
transported from Pune to Delhi. When the truck reached Delhi, it
was found that 31 bags containing scrap material and 7 sewing
machines were missing from the truck. Thus, the main allegations
are against the police officer, Kishor Nerkar, who has been arrested
and subsequently granted regular bail.
7. As far as the present Applicant is concerned, the prosecution
case is that the Applicant executed a notarized document dated 1 st
December 2022 in respect of the subject truck and its
transportation, which document is alleged to be antedated.
However, the prosecution case primarily concerns the conduct of
the police officer in stopping the truck, demanding Rs.20,00,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Lakh only), negotiating the said amount and,
during the said process, removal of 31 bags containing scrap
Page 5
Sonali
908-ABA-1892-2026.DOC
material and 7 sewing machines, amounting to theft of the said
goods. Thus, the Applicant has no role in the main alleged offence.
8. Even if the prosecution case is accepted as it is, then also it is
clear that the Applicant at the instance of accused No.1-Kishor
Nerkar was present at the spot and removed the said scrap
material. However, it is clear that the Applicant was not a part of
the alleged act of demanding Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh
only) by the police officer, negotiating the said amount, or
threatening the driver and owner of the subject truck. There are no
other antecedents against the Applicant. The Applicant is ready
and willing to cooperate with the investigation.
9. Accordingly, the case is made out for grant of Anticipatory
Bail. However, in the facts and circumstances, very stringent
conditions are required to be imposed. In view thereof, the
following order is passed:
ORDER
(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant-Sarfarazuddin
Mohammad Yunus Shaikh in connection with C.R.
No.135 of 2025 registered with the Malegaon Taluka
Page 6
Sonali
908-ABA-1892-2026.DOC
Police Station, Nashik Rural, Nashik, the Applicant is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R.
Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two
solvent sureties in the like amount.
(b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police
Station on 30th September 2026 and 1 st October 2026
between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. and shall cooperate
with the investigation.
(c) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police
Station on every Sunday between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00
p.m. till conclusion of the trial.
(d) 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.
(e) 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.
Page 7
Sonali
908-ABA-1892-2026.DOC
(f) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not contact or influence the
Complainant or any witness in any manner.
(g) The Applicant shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court.
10. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Digitally
signed by
SONALI
SONALI MILIND
MILIND PATIL
PATIL Date:
2026.09.23
10:47:40
+0530
Page 8
Sonali
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.