Bombay High Court
ARUN RAGHUNATH MADGUDEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
In the absence of any material showing the applicant’s knowledge of the stolen nature of the dry fruits, anticipatory bail must be granted, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The applicant, a dry‑fruit trader, sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 417 of 2026 alleging that he purchased dry fruits allegedly stolen by co‑accused. The prosecution argued that the applicant, a former Mathadi worker, had knowledge of the stolen goods and that custodial interrogation was necessary. The court examined the FIR, the applicant’s retirement card and Udyam Registration Certificate and found no material indicating his knowledge of the stolen nature of the goods. It held that there was no basis to link the monetary transactions to the offence and that the applicant had cooperated with the investigation. Consequently, the court confirmed the interim protection and granted anticipatory bail subject to standard conditions, including a bail bond, cooperation with police, and non‑interference with evidence or witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the alleged offence is purchase of stolen property without proof of knowledge.
- Whether custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation.
- Whether conditions can be imposed on the grant of anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 316(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- personal liberty
- stolen property
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 316(4)
- Section 3(5)
- bail conditions
Judgment
1-ABA-2529-2026.doc
vaishnavi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2529 OF 2026
Arun Raghunath Madgude ...Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Adv. Nikhil Wadikar a/w Adv. Pradip Zende, Adv. Kastur Patil, Adv. Pratik
Deore for the Applicant.
Adv. Arfan Sait, APP for the Respondent – State.
Mr. Nilesh Patil, API, APMC Police Station is present.
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 1ST OCTOBER 2026.
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the
respondent -State.
2. The applicant has filed instant application seeking pre-arrest bail
in connection with FIR No. 417 of 2026 registered with APMC Police
Station for offence punishable under Section 316(4) read with Section 3(5)
of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the offence is
registered on the basis of allegations that this applicant has purchased some
dry fruits from the main accused persons, which were allegedly stolen by
them. He also submits that the applicant is a businessman who is trading in
1/4
1-ABA-2529-2026.doc
dry fruits and there is no material to show that the applicant had any
knowledge that the dry fruits were stolen property. Apart from this, he
submits that the reasons for rejection of the anticipatory bail by the Sessions
Court are absolutely unsustainable, since the applicant has got the document
to show that on 24 September 2024, the applicant got retired as Mathadi
worker and thereafter on 14 November 2024, he has got registered with a
Udyam Registration Certificate in the name of Akash Enterprises, on the
basis of which he is carrying on the business. In view of these documents,
which are placed on record at page 65 and 67 of the application, the learned
counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations about the monetary
transactions made by this applicant in his business cannot be made any basis
for implication of this applicant in the instant offence. He also states that
there are no criminal antecedents against this applicant and he has attended
the police station in accordance with interim order dated 8 th September 2026
and prays for confirmation of interim protection order.
4. The learned APP for the respondent opposed the application by
stating that the applicant was previously working as a Mathadi worker in
APMC and it is alleged that he had knowledge about the stolen goods. There
are monetary transactions between this applicant and the co-accused which
shows nexus between the applicant and the alleged offense. Therefore, he
submits that the applicant’s custodial interrogation is necessary for further
investigation.
2/4
1-ABA-2529-2026.doc
5. Perused the FIR and documents filed on record. It is alleged in
the report that the goods were stolen and this applicant had purchased the
goods. It has to be noted that apart from bare allegations that this applicant
has purchased the dry fruits, there is no material to show that he has any
knowledge that the goods were stolen property. Considering the nature of
allegations against the applicant and on perusal of the documents in the
nature of retirement card and Udyam Registration Certificate, it prima facie
appears that, the contentions of the prosecution about purchasing of
dry fruits and the monetary transactions by this applicant cannot be
connected with the offence. Also, there does not appear any need for
custody of the applicant as he has extended the co-operation in accordance
with interim protection granted by this Court and there is nothing to show
that this applicant has misused the liberty.
6. Considering all the above aspects, the personal liberty 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.
7. Hence I pass the following order
: ORDER :
i. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
ii. In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with FIR No.
417 of 2026 registered with APMC Police Station for offence
3/4
1-ABA-2529-2026.doc
punishable under Section 316(4) read with Section 3(5) of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 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 like amount.
iii. The applicant is directed to attend the police station as and when
called upon and shall cooperate during investigation and trial.
iv. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or
influence the informant and witnesses, directly or indirectly.
v. The applicant shall produce documents related to bank transactions,
if demanded by investigating agency.
vi. In the event, the applicant violates any of these conditions
specified in this order, the same would be a ground for cancellation
of anticipatory bail.
8. In view of this, the instant Anticipatory Bail Application is
allowed and disposed of.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
4/4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.