Bombay High Court
MOHMMAD AFTAB TAJ MOHAMMADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the applicant subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Mohammad Aftab Taj Mohammad, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 106 of 2026 alleging that he purchased iron rods allegedly stolen by other accused. The FIR alleges theft of iron rods worth Rs. 25,000, but there is no evidence that the applicant knew the rods were stolen, and the goods have already been seized. The State contended that the rods were sold to the applicant but did not dispute the seizure or the applicant’s clean record. The Court examined the nature of the offence, the lack of any indication of knowledge of stolen property, and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, concluding that custody is unnecessary. Accordingly, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a personal bond of Rs. 25,000, one surety, and conditions to attend police stations and disclose transactions, holding that breach of conditions would lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to a person alleged to have purchased stolen property without knowledge of its stolen nature.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 35(3), 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(2), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- stolen property
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
910-ABA-2490-2026.ODT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2490 OF 2026
Mohmmad Aftab Taj Mohammad …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Adv. Abdul Hafeez Yakub Kopwala a/w Adv. Shazia Bano Mohd.
Shoeb, Adv. Tasmiya Siddiqui, Adv. Fatima i/b Sumaira Legal
Associates,, for the Applicant.
Mrs. Megha S. Bajoria, A.P. P., for the Respondent – State.
API Pallavi Dhagepatil, Crime Branch, Thane, Unit-5, is present.
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 3RD SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C:-
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned
APP for respondent – State.
2. The applicant has filed instant application under Section
482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking
pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 106 of 2026, dated
12.04.2026, registered with Kongaon Police Station, Thane City,
for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2) read with
Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Page 1 of 4
rd
3 September 2026
910-ABA-2490-2026.ODT
3. Learned counsel for applicant states that the allegations in
the FIR are that the main accused persons have sold the stolen
iron rods, worth Rs. 25,000/- to this applicant. He submits that
there is nothing to indicate that this applicant has purchased
any iron rods knowing them to be stolen property. He states that
the iron rods are already seized by the investigating agency and
a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 was served upon the main accused persons and
thereafter they have not been arrested. Further, it is stated that
there are no criminal antecedents against this applicant.
4. Learned APP submitted that there are allegations of theft
of iron rods by the accused persons, who have stated that the
stolen articles were sold to this applicant. However there is no
dispute about the contention that the goods have been seized
and further there is no dispute about the contention that there
are no criminal antecedents against this applicant.
5. On perusal of FIR, it appears that the primary allegations
about theft of the iron rods are against the other accused
persons. At this stage, there is nothing to show that this
applicant has purchased the iron rods knowing them to be
Page 2 of 4
rd
3 September 2026
910-ABA-2490-2026.ODT
stolen property. Considering the nature of allegations against
this applicant and the fact that the goods are already seized, at
this stage, there does not appear any need of the custody of this
applicant.
6. Considering the nature of offence and allegations against
this applicant, the presence of this applicant can be secured by
directing him to join the investigation and therefore the
personal liberty of this applicant needs to be protected subject to
certain conditions.
7. Hence, I pass following order :-
ORDER
(i) The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.
(ii) In the event of arrest of this applicant in Crime
No. in connection with Crime No. 106 of 2026,
dated 12.04.2026, registered with Kongaon
Police Station, Thane City, for the offence
punishable under Sections 316(2) read with
Section 3(5) of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, he be released on bail on furnishing P. R.
Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the
Page 3 of 4
rd
3 September 2026
910-ABA-2490-2026.ODT
like amount.
(iii) The applicant is directed to attend the Police
Station on every Monday in between 10:00
a.m. to 2:00 p.m., for a period of one month
and thereafter as and when called upon by the
investigating agency.
(iv) The applicant is directed to disclose all the
transactions in relation to the offence in
question.
(v) Breach of any of these conditions, shall be a
ground for cancellation of the bail.
8. Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of in above
terms.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
VDMokal/-
Page 4 of 4
rd
3 September 2026
Checking your session…