Bombay High Court
RAKESH TUKARAM KOSHTIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant with conditions, finding that the alleged role of merely providing a vehicle did not justify denial of bail.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Rakesh Tukaram Koshti under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with a FIR alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Arms Act and the Maharashtra Police Act. The prosecution alleged that the applicant had provided a vehicle to the main assailant in a violent incident that resulted in grievous injuries, while the applicant contended that his only role was merely harbouring the accused and that he had no direct participation in the crime. The court examined the applicant’s antecedent record, noting that most cases were dated before 2017 and that he had been acquitted in six of them, including the most recent case of 2023. Weighing the limited alleged involvement against the applicant’s criminal history, the court found sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail, subject to stringent conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation and prevent interference with witnesses. The order directed the applicant to furnish a bond, attend the police station on specified dates, provide contact details, refrain from influencing witnesses, and not leave India without permission.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant, alleged to have provided a vehicle to the main assailant, is liable to be arrested and denied anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS.
- Whether the applicant's prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25, 3
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 118(2), 140, 190, 191(3), 351(2), 352
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 — s. 135
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- harbouring
- criminal antecedents
- bail conditions
- BNSS
- BNS
- Arms Act
- Maharashtra Police Act
Judgment
44-ABA-2559-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2559 OF 2026
Rakesh Tukaram Koshti …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Pratik Kalantri (through Video Conferencing) a/w. Mr. Mahesh
Pawar, for the Applicant.
Mrs. M. R. Tidke, APP, for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Dattatraya Pote, PSI, attached to Sarkarwada Police Station,
Nashik, present.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 5th OCTOBER 2026
PC:-
1. Heard Mr. Kalantri, learned Counsel appearing for the
Applicant and Mrs. Tikde, learned APP appearing for the
Respondent-State.
2. This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”) seeking pre-arrest bail
in connection with C.R. No.275 of 2025 registered with
Sarkarwada Police Station, Nashik, for the offences punishable
under Sections 109, 140, 118(2), 191(3), 190, 351(2) and 352 of
Page 1
Sonali
44-ABA-2559-2026.DOC
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”), Sections 3, 25 of the
Arms Act, 1959 and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act,
1951.
3. It is the submission of Mr. Kalantri, learned Counsel
appearing for the Applicant that the only role attributed to the
Applicant is of harbouring the accused. He submits that there is no
other role attributed to the Applicant. He submits that the
Applicant is not involved in the crime. He further submits that
although there are 11 antecedents, most of the antecedents were
registered before 2017 and one antecedent is of the year 2023. He
submits that the Applicant has been acquitted in six cases and
details of the same are set out on page 5 and 6 of the Anticipatory
Bail Application.
4. On the other hand, Mrs. Tidke, learned APP strongly opposes
the Anticipatory Bail Application. She submits that the Applicant is
involved in the crime. The Applicant has provided a vehicle to the
main assailant when the main assailant had gone to Belgaum. She
therefore, submits that the Anticipatory Bail Application be
rejected.
Page 2
Sonali
44-ABA-2559-2026.DOC
5. The prosecution case is set out in paragraph No.2 of the
order dated 24th August 2026, passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Nashik, in Criminal Bail Application No.1607 of
2026, which reads as under:
“2. According to the prosecution, on 29-09-2025
at about 01-30 to 02-00 a.m. while the
informant, his friend Sachin Sangale and
Rishikesh Jadhav were proceeding towards Vise
Square by car, at that time the accused Tukaram
Chothave and Ajay Borisa along with 10 to 12
other associates came there in two cars and said
had he came there to kill them. The scuffle
started between them. Accused Ajay Borisa shot
fire twice from the gun. The informant dodged
the gun and saved his life. The accused and their
associates then carried the informant in their 7-
seater car to Ramwadi, Adarshnagar. Other
accused taken Sachin Sangale and Rishikesh
Jadhav in their car in the same direction.
Informant’s friend Sachin Sangale ran away from
the spot. At that time the friend of informant
namely Sachin Sangale started running from the
spot, at that time accused Ajay Borisa fired gun
towards Sachin but it was landed on the dickey of
the car. The accused assaulted badly to the
informant and his brother-in-law Rishikesh
Jadhav by iron Tommy and fists and kick. The
informant and the Rishikesh Jadhav sustained
grievous fracture injuries. The accused Ajay
Borisa and Tukaram Chothave having grudge
against the informant on the count of their
previous enmity attacked him with intention to
kill. Hence, the report.”
Page 3
Sonali
44-ABA-2559-2026.DOC
6. Even as per the prosecution case the Applicant is not
involved in the main incident. The only role which is attributed to
the present Applicant is that the present Applicant has provided a
vehicle to the main assailant when has has gone to Belgaum. The
said vehicle is standing in the name of Applicant’s father. Thus, the
only role attributed to the Applicant is harbouring the accused.
Although there are 11 antecedents against the Applicant, most of
the FIRs registered between the period from 2006 to 2017. The
last offence is of the year 2023, where the Applicant has been
acquitted.
7. Accordingly, the case is made out for grant of Anticipatory
Bail by imposing stringent conditions. In view thereof, the
following order is passed:
ORDER
(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant-Rakesh
Tukaram Koshti in connection with C.R. No.275 of
2025 registered with the Sarkarwada Police Station,
Nashik, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail
on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of
Page 4
Sonali
44-ABA-2559-2026.DOC
Rs.1,00,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the
like amount.
(b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police
Station on 12th October 2026 and 13th October 2026
between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. and shall cooperate
with the investigation.
(c) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police
Station once in fifteen days on every first and third
Sunday between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. till
conclusion of the trial.
(d) The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and
residential address to the Investigating Officer and
shall keep the same updated, in case of any change
thereto.
(e) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat, or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or
to any Police personnel.
(f) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
Page 5
Sonali
44-ABA-2559-2026.DOC
evidence and shall not contact or influence the
Complainant or any witness in any manner.
(g) The Applicant shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court.
8. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 6
Sonali
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.