Mohammed Rafiq Khan alias BatlaversusThe State of Maharashtra

                                                                           905.ABA-2015.26.DOC




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
             Digitally signed
             by PRACHI
PRACHI       PRANESH
PRANESH
NANDIWADEKAR
             NANDIWADEKAR               CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
             Date: 2026.08.27
             15:38:43 +0530
                                 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2015 OF 2026

                      Mohammed Rafiq Khan alias Batla                       … Applicant
                      V/s.
                      State of Maharashtra                           …. Respondent
                                                   ______________________
                      Ms. Siddh Vidya a/w Ms. Mansi Sahani, Ms. Akshata Morye, Ms.
                      Rohini Kaushal i/by Siddh Vidya & Associates, for the Applicant.
                      Mr. S. V. Walve, APP, for the Respondent-State.
                      Mr. Ram Talekar, PSI attached to Mangaon Police Station, District
                      Raigad present.
                                                   ______________________


                                                   CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
                                                   DATED : 25 AUGUST 2026
                      P. C. :-

                      1.         Heard Ms. Vidya, learned Counsel appearing for the

                      Applicant and Mr. Walve, learned APP appearing for the

                      Respondent-State.


                      2.         By this application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya

                      Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Applicant is seeking pre-

                      arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 116 of 2026 registered with

                      Mangaon Police Station, District Raigad for the offences punishable




                                                         Page 1
                      PPN
                                                           905.ABA-2015.26.DOC




under Sections 310(2), 311, 127(2), 331(6), 324(4) and 351(2) of

the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.


3.    The prosecution case is set out in paragraph nos.4 to 4.6 of

the Anticipatory Bail Application which reads as under :-

      “4.    That, the brief facts of the case are as under:-

      4.1.    That, the informant, Mr. Avil Jeram Menezes is the
      liquidator appointed by the Hon’ble Court for present company
      i.e., Pioneer Gas Power Plant, Vile Bhagad, Mangaon
      (hereinafter referred as the company).

      4.2.    That, the informant received a call from one Mr. Rushi
      Rajkumar Janardhan Singh, Maintenance person of Pioneer Gas
      Power Plant on 19/04/2026 at 07:45 am in the morning stating
      that a robbery has taken place at the Pioneer Power Gas Plant
      premises between 18/04/2026 (20:00 hrs) and 19/04/2026
      (06:00 hrs).

      4.3.    That, the informant visited the premises on the same
      date at around 02:00 p.m. and lodged an FIR at Mangaon Police
      Station.

      4.4.   That, the FIR stated that 7 to 8 unknown persons
      entered into the company, threatened the nine security guards
      with knives and sticks and confined them in Rest-house of the
      company snatched their mobile phones, broke CCTV cameras
      and took its memory cards. The unknown persons also snatched
      two of the mobile phones and stole copper wire, batteries, and
      other materials valued at Rs. 4,13,000/- from the company.

      4.5.   That, the FIR was registered against 8 unknown persons
      and the Applicant herein was not named anywhere in the FIR.
      Subsequently, the prosecution started making arrests and till
      date have arrested about 18 persons in connection with this
      FIR.

      4.6.     That, as per the prosecution two of the arrested suspects
      i.e., Ketan Kode and Rakesh Gosavi have allegedly implicated
      the Applicant herein in their custodial confessional statements.
      Accordingly, the Respondent has implicated the Applicant




                                    Page 2
PPN
                                                        905.ABA-2015.26.DOC




      herein the present crime and seeking arrest of the Applicant as
      per the Remand Reports filed by the Respondent time to time.”


4.    It is the submission of Ms. Vidya, learned counsel appearing

for the Applicant that the Applicant is not at all involved in the

crime. She submits that total 7 remand reports are filed and in

every remand report, the number of Accused are added. As per the

last remand report i.e., 7th Remand Report, 19 Accused were

arrested and 13 Accused remained to be arrested. She submits

that the subject company is in possession of the Liquidator and

earlier also robbery has taken place, where the police are involved

and six police personnel were suspended. It is submitted that the

Applicant is one of the witness in the said case against police and

therefore, false case has been lodged against the Applicant.


5.    On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the

Respondent-State submitted that earlier also, there was a robbery

and as the said company is in possession of the Liquidator, serious

action was required to be taken, however, as police has shown

dereliction in duty and, therefore, six police personnel were

suspended and enquiry was lodged. He submitted that the

Applicant was not witness in that said case but another Co-accused

in this case was the witness who was working with the Applicant



                                   Page 3
PPN
                                                  905.ABA-2015.26.DOC




as a Driver. He further submitted that in this case, there is

sufficient material showing the involvement of the Applicant in the

crime. He submitted that during investigation, it has transpired

that the Applicant has main role and the Applicant was in contact

with most of the Co-accused and when the incident took place,

there was conversation between the Applicant and the other Co-

accused. He submited that during investigation, the role of the

Applicant has been revealed and it was found that the Applicant

has conducted the inspection of this company before the

commission of the offence and in fact, the Applicant is a main

person who has drawn the strategy about the manner in which the

offence is to be committed.


6.    A perusal of the record shows that Pioneer Gas Power Plant,

Village Bhagad, MIDC, Mangaon, Tal. Mangaon, District Raigad

was in the possession of the Liquidator. The area of the said

company is very huge. The learned APP has pointed out to this

Court the material showing that the present Applicant is in fact the

main Accused and he has drawn the strategy about the manner in

which the offence is to be committed. During the relevant time, he

was in contact with most of the Accused and there were




                               Page 4
PPN
                                                   905.ABA-2015.26.DOC




conversations on Cell Phone between the Applicant and many

Co-accused during the relevant time when the offence took place.

The offence is very serious. The Accused before commission of the

offence has damaged CCTVs which were installed at the said Gas

Power Plant so that the offence can be committed without

detection.


7.    Thus, in the facts and circumstances, no case is made out for

grant of anticipatory bail.


8.    Anticipatory Bail Application is rejected.




                                          [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]




                                Page 5
PPN