Bombay High Court
BABAR SALAHUDDIN KHAN AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to strict conditions, as the applicants are ready to undertake not to deal in Gutkha and the majority of charges are bailable.
Summary
Babar and Rustam Salahuddin Khan applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under the Food Safety Act, 2006 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly dealing in contraband Gutkha. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence and five prior similar convictions. The defence argued that, except for the charge under Section 123 BNS (formerly IPC 328), all other charges are bailable and the Supreme Court is yet to decide on the applicability of Section 328 to similar cases. The court noted the applicants' willingness to give a strict undertaking not to deal in Gutkha and, despite the antecedents, found the case made out for anticipatory bail with stringent conditions. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail, directing a bond, regular police reporting, undertakings, and other restrictions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when one of the charges is non‑bailable (Section 123 BNS/IPC 328) pending a Supreme Court ruling.
- Whether the applicants' five prior similar convictions preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions, if any, should be imposed on anticipatory bail in this context.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 123, 223, 274, 275, 3(5)
- Food Safety Act, 2006 — s. 26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), 27(3)(e), 30(2)(a), 3(1)(zz)(iv), 59
- Indian Penal Code — s. 328
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Food Safety Act
- contraband
- Gutkha
- non‑bailable offence
- bail conditions
- prior convictions
Judgment
928 ABA-2647-2026.DOC
skt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2647 OF 2026
1. Babar Salahuddin Khan …Applicants
2. Rustam Salahuddin Khan
Vs.
State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Amey Prakash Sheth, for the Applicants.
Mrs. M.R. Tidke, APP for the Respondent-State.
PSI Hasina Hamid Shaikh, Chikhali Police Station, Pimpri-
Chinchwad.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Amey Sheth, learned counsel appearing for the
Applicants and Mrs. M.R. Tidke, learned APP appearing for the
Respondent-State.
2. By the present Applications, the Applicants are seeking pre-
arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 264 of 2026 registered on
20th June 2026 under Sections 26(2)(i), 26(2)(iv), 27(3)(e), 3(1)
(zz)(iv), 30(2)(a) and 59 of the Food Safety Act, 2006 and
Sections 123, 223, 274, 275 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Page 1 of 6
23rd September, 2026
928 ABA-2647-2026.DOC
skt
Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”) registered with Chikhali Police Station,
Pimpri Chinchwad.
3. As per the prosecution case, the Applicants were found
dealing with contraband material i.e Gutkha which is unsafe and
dangerous for the health of people.
4. It is the submission of Mr. Sheth, learned counsel for the
Applicants that except the offence under Section 123 of BNS (i.e
328 of IPC), all other offenses are bailable offences. He submits
that as far as Section 328 of IPC is concerned, the Supreme Court
is considering the applicability of Section 328 of IPC to the similar
cases. He therefore, states that the Anticipatory Bail be granted.
5. On the other hand, Mrs. Tidke, learned APP strongly opposes
the Anticipatory Bail Application. She submits that the offence is
very serious, and therefore, the Anticipatory Bail Applications be
rejected. She submits that the Applicant has five antecedents of
similar nature. She, therefore, submits that the Anticipatory Bail
Application be rejected.
Page 2 of 6
23rd September, 2026
928 ABA-2647-2026.DOC
skt
6. Learned APP submits that if this Court is inclined to grant
Anticipatory Bail then the Applicants be directed to give
undertaking in terms of order of the Supreme Court in the case of
Abhijit Jitendra Lolage Vs. State of Maharashtra 1 and more
particularly relies on following condition imposed by the Supreme
Court in case of similar offences :-
“It is deemed appropriate to impose the condition – “I,
Abhijeet Jitendra Lolage do undertake to not deal with
Gutkha, that is, Pan Masala with Tobacco”. In case, the
appellant – Abhijeet Jitendra Lolage violates the terms
and conditions of bail, including the undertaking
imposed, it would be open to the prosecution to seek
cancellation of bail. ”
(Emphasis added)
7. Mr. Sheth, learned counsel appearing for the Applicants,
after taking instructions, submits that the Applicants will give the
undertaking.
8. The Supreme Court in the said order has imposed the above
conditions in case of similar offence.
1 SLP (Cri.) Diary No. 2806/2023
Page 3 of 6
23rd September, 2026
928 ABA-2647-2026.DOC
skt
9. Perusal of the record shows that except the offence under
Section 123 of BNS (i.e earlier Section 328 of IPC), the other
offences are bailable offences. The issue whether Section 328 of
IPC will apply to similar cases is pending before the Supreme
Court. As the Applicants are ready to give the undertaking that
they will not deal with Gutkha and Tobacco products in any
manner whatsoever, the case is made out for grant of anticipatory
bail.
10. Although there are five antecedents against the Applicants,
he has been released on regular bail in two cases and anticipatory
bail in three cases. However, as there are five antecedents
stringent conditions are required to be imposed.
11. Accordingly, a case is made out for grant of Anticipatory Bail.
In view thereof, the following order is passed:-
ORDER
(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant No.1- Babar
Salahuddin Khan and Applicant No.2-Rustam Salahuddin
Khan in connection with C.R. No. 264 of 2026 registered
Page 4 of 6
23rd September, 2026
928 ABA-2647-2026.DOC
skt
with Chikhli Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, the
Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their
furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, each,
with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.
(b) The Applicants shall attend the concerned police
station once in a week, i.e., on each Monday between 11:00
A.M. to 2:00 P.M. for a period of 1 year i.e upto 30 th
September 2027 and thereafter once in a month i.e on first
Monday of each month between 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM till
the conclusion of the trial.
(c) The Applicants to furnish undertakings to the effect
that they will not deal with banned products i.e. Gutkha,
Pan Masala with Tobacco products in any manner
whatsoever. Such undertakings are to be filed in this Court
within a period of two weeks from today. The Applicants to
strictly comply with the said undertakings.
(d) The Applicants shall furnish their cell phone
numbers and residential addresses to the Investigating
Page 5 of 6
23rd September, 2026
928 ABA-2647-2026.DOC
skt
Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any
change thereto.
(e) The Applicants 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 Applicants shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the
Complainant or any witness in any manner.
(g) The Applicants shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court.
(h) In case, the Applicants violate the terms and
conditions of bail, including the undertaking, it would be
open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.
12. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 6 of 6
23rd September, 2026
Checking your session…