Bombay High Court
DIKSHA NARESH SHINDEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the applicant, subject to conditions, as there is no necessity for custodial interrogation.
Summary
The applicant, Diksha Naresh Shinde, sought anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR alleging she instigated a group that attacked a government driver. The FIR listed offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, but the applicant was not accused of any physical assault. The Sessions Court had noted discrepancies in the victim's injury certificates, indicating no grievous injuries. The High Court observed that the investigation was complete, charge‑sheets were filed against other accused, and there was no need for custodial interrogation of the applicant. Considering the lack of direct involvement and the ability to impose conditions to prevent witness tampering, the Court granted anticipatory bail with specific conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a person alleged only to have instigated an assault on a government servant under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the applicant's arrest is necessary for custodial interrogation or to prevent witness tampering.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 324(4)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- instigation
- assault on government servant
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail conditions
- witness tampering
- criminal procedure
Judgment
903-ABA-2400-2026.odt
Harish
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2400 OF 2026
Diksha Naresh Shinde ...Applicant
V/s.
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
_____________________________________________________________
Adv. Viresh Purwant a/w Adv. Suraj Gadkari, for the Applicant.
Adv. Prasanna P. Malashe, APP for the Respondent – State.
PSI – Mr. R. D. Narsinge, Kopari Police Station, is present.
________________________________________________________
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 28TH AUGUST, 2026.
P.C. :-
1. Heard Adv. Viresh Purwant, for the applicant and Adv.
Prasanna P. Malashe, learned APP for the respondent-state.
2. The applicant has filed the instant application seeking pre-
arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 162 of 2026 dated 10.04.2026,
1/6
903-ABA-2400-2026.odt
registered with Kopari Police Station, Thane (City), for the offences
punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2),
191(3), and 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
3. The FIR came to be registered on the basis of a report lodged
by Ankush Ramchandra Bhote, who is a driver in the Transport
Department. He has alleged in the report that on 09.04.2026 there was an
incident of quarrel and scuffle by a group of persons with him, on account
of driving the vehicles in a rash and negligent manner. He has alleged that
on 09.04.2026, at about 3:20 p.m., a group of persons attacked him on the
instigation of this applicant, who had allegedly said, ‘attack the driver’. It
is alleged that on her instigation the accused persons have attacked the
complainant by wooden sticks, fists and blows. On the basis of these
allegations, the FIR came to be registered against one Mr. Nilesh Ganesh
Shinde and eight other unknown persons.
4. Advocate Viresh Purvant, learned counsel for the applicant
submitted that the only role attributed to this applicant is her alleged
instigation to attack the driver. He states that there are no allegations of
any attack by this applicant. He further states that the main accused Nitesh
Naresh Shinde is already released on regular bail. He invites my attention
to the observations recorded by the Sessions Court in his bail order dated
2/6
903-ABA-2400-2026.odt
31.07.2026 in Sessions Case No. 237 of 2026 and submits that there is a
discrepancy with respect to injuries in the injury certificates issued by
Siddhivinayak Hospital and Civil Hospital Thane. He, therefore, submits
that in fact there are no external injuries on the victim. In any case, he
submits that the attack is not attributed to this applicant. Apart from this,
he states that the charge-sheet is already filed against the other accused
persons and there are no criminal antecedents against this applicant and
therefore she be granted anticipatory bail.
5. Per contra, learned APP for the respondent had opposed the
application and submitted that the offence of attack on a government
servant is a serious offence. He submitted that the role of this applicant in
instigating the other accused persons who had formed an unlawful
assembly and ultimately attacked the Government Official demonstrates
the gravity of her role in the entire incident. He submits that the charge-
sheet is filed only against only two accused persons and seven other
accused persons are still absconding.
6. I have perused the FIR and the documents placed on record. It
has to be noted that the only role attributed to this applicant is about
instigating the other accused persons. There is no overt act of physical
assault attributed to this applicant. Even as regards the injuries, there is a
3/6
903-ABA-2400-2026.odt
discrepancy as observed by the sessions court in the bail order of Mr.
Nilesh Ganesh Shinde, observing thereby that the injury certificate issued
by Siddhivinayak Hospital does not show any grievous injuries. It has
been observed that the injury certificate issued by Civil Hospital Thane
where the injured was immediately taken after the incident, states that
there are no external injuries on the body of complainant. These pertinent
observations are recorded by the Sessions Court in its order dated
31.07.2026 as referred above.
7. It has to be noted that the investigation in the matter is
completed and charge-sheet is filed against two other co-accused persons.
The weapon used in the offence has already been seized. Considering the
role attributed to this applicant, there is no need of custodial interrogation
of this applicant. The apprehension of the prosecution that there is a
possibility of tampering the witnesses can be taken care of by imposing
certain conditions upon the applicant.
8. Considering all the above-mentioned aspects and absence of
any factors demonstrating any need for her custodial interrogation, the
personal liberty of the applicant needs to be protected, subject to certain
conditions.
9. Hence, I pass the following order.
4/6
903-ABA-2400-2026.odt
: ORDER :
(i) The application for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
(ii) In the event of arrest of this applicant in
Crime No. 162 of 2026 dated 10.04.2026,
registered with Kopari Police Station, Thane
(City), for the offence punishable under Sections
109, 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3),
and 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS),
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 on every Monday in between 10:00 a.m. to
02:00 p.m. for a period of four weeks from today.
(iv) The applicant is directed to deposit her
mobile phone with the investigating agency and
furnish the details of Aadhar Card and residential
address.
5/6
903-ABA-2400-2026.odt
(v) The applicant shall not pressurize the
prosecution witnesses in any manner.
(vi) The applicant shall extend cooperation
during investigation and trial.
9. The instant application for anticipatory bail is allowed in
above terms.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
6/6
Checking your session…