Bombay High Court
MANPREET KAURversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, granting bail subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Manpreet Kaur, a partner in a courier company, was implicated in a complaint alleging non‑payment of Rs 23,08,476 to a complainant, leading to charges under Sections 318(4) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. She filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, asserting that the dispute is essentially civil and that a charge‑sheet has already been filed. The State opposed bail, citing specific allegations against her and her criminal antecedents, arguing that custody was necessary for investigation. The Court examined the FIR and found no indication of an intent to deceive at the outset, noting that the matter appears to be a recovery suit disguised as a criminal case. Consequently, the Court confirmed the interim protection order and granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions, emphasizing the protection of personal liberty while ensuring cooperation with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in a case involving alleged civil‑commercial dispute.
- Whether the existence of a charge‑sheet and the nature of the allegations justify custodial interrogation.
- Whether the applicant’s personal liberty outweighs the State’s interest in securing further investigation.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 318(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- civil dispute
- commercial transaction
- personal liberty
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- bail conditions
- investigation
Judgment
909-ABA-2173-2026.ODT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2173 OF 2026
Manpreet Kaur …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra And Anr. …Respondents
Adv. Karma Vivan a/w Adv. Subhanwith Ghosh i/b Adv. Yash
Awalkanthe, for Applicant.
Mrs. Geeta P. Mulekar, A.P. P., for Respondent – State.
Adv. Prateek Sakhalkar (Through V. C.), for Respondent No. 2.
API Bhalchandra Shinde, Borivali Police Station, Mumbai,
is present.
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 7TH OCTOBER 2026
P. C:-
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as
learned APP for the respondent – State and learned counsel for
respondent no. 2.
2. The applicant has filed the instant application under
Section 482 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for
short “BNSS”) seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime
No. 560 of 2026 dated 07.04.2026, registered with Borivali Police
Station, Brihanmumbai, for the offence under Sections 318 (4)
Page 1 of 5
th
7 October 2026
909-ABA-2173-2026.ODT
read with 3(5) of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short
“BNS”).
3. The allegations in the FIR are that during the period
from 12th August, 2024 to December 2025, the company of this
applicant has failed to return an amount of Rs. 23,08,476/- to the
informant which was on amount of transactions for courier of
certain goods in and out of India. It is alleged that on account of
non-payment of this amount, the complainant has been cheated.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
transactions on behalf of the company of the applicant are part of
the regular commercial activities and there is nothing to indicate
any inducement since inception to cheat the complainant. The
applicant is merely a partner in the company and inducement to
cheat the complainant if any, was done by co-accused Imran, who
was arrested and released on bail. Learned counsel submits that
there is no question of recovery from this applicant as the charge
sheet is already filed. He further submits that applicant has
attended the police station in accordance with interim order dated
20th August 2026 and thus, prays for confirmation of interim
protection order.
Page 2 of 5
th
7 October 2026
909-ABA-2173-2026.ODT
5. Learned APP for the respondent – State opposes the
application by stating that there are allegations about the role
played by this applicant and other accused persons, who are
partners in the company and further that the allegations of non-
payment of the amount of Rs. 23,08,476/- are specific. She
further submits that there are criminal antecedents against this
applicant and custody of this applicant is necessary for further
investigation.
6. Perused the FIR and the documents placed on record.
The allegations in the report clearly shows that the transaction is
civil in nature and there is nothing to indicate at this stage, any
intention to deceive since beginning. It appears that the complaint
is lodged merely for the purpose of recovery of the balance
amount and the civil transactions is given colour of the criminal
offence. Further, since chargesheet is filed there is no question of
any recovery from this applicant. Pertinent to note, after interim
protection was granted, there is nothing on record to indicate that
this applicant has misused the liberty, thus the custodial
interrogation of this applicant does not appear to be necessary.
7. Considering all the above aspects, the personal liberty
Page 3 of 5
th
7 October 2026
909-ABA-2173-2026.ODT
of this applicant needs to be protected and hence, the interim
protection granted to the applicant earlier needs to be
confirmed, subject to certain conditions.
8. Hence, I pass following order :-
ORDER
(i) The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.
(ii) In the event of arrest of this applicant in
connection with Crime No. 560 of 2026
registered with Borivali Police Station,
Brihanmumbai, for the offence punishable
under Sections 318(4) read with 3(5) of The
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, she be
released on bail on furnishing P. R. Bond of
Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand
only) with one solvent surety of the like
amount.
(iii) The applicant is directed to attend the Police
Station as and when called upon by the
investigating agency and shall cooperate
during investigation and trial.
(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence the
informant or any other prosecution witnesses,
in any manner.
Page 4 of 5
th
7 October 2026
909-ABA-2173-2026.ODT
(v) The applicant is directed to disclose all the
transactions made by her through her
company.
(vi) Breach of any of these conditions, shall be a
ground for cancellation of the bail.
(vii) The Investigating Officer is directed to send
notice prior to one week to the applicant for
attending the police station.
(viii) The applicant shall not leave India without
permission of this Court
9. In view of this, the instant Anticipatory Bail
Application is allowed and disposed of.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
VDMokal/-
Page 5 of 5
th
7 October 2026
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.