Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

BALASAHEB NANDU DALBHAGATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants with specified conditions.

Summary

The applicants filed anticipatory bail applications under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking pre‑arrest bail for alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 118(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, arising from an assault on the first informant. The prosecution argued that the injuries were grievous, warranting denial of bail. The court noted that a Single Judge had already granted interim protection on 13 January 2025, which remained in force and showed no evidence of misuse. Considering the continued interim protection and the lack of contrary material, the court found the case made out for granting anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the court ordered the release of the applicants on bail with a bond of Rs.25,000 each and imposed standard conditions such as cooperation with investigation, non‑interference with witnesses, and restriction on travel abroad.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the allegation of grievous injuries to the complainant.
  • Whether the interim protection previously granted has been misused, warranting its revocation.
  • Whether Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, empowers the court to grant anticipatory bail in the present circumstances.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 482
  • grievous injury
  • bail conditions
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                                                                   902-ABA-3593-2024.DOC




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3593 OF 2024
                      1. Santosh Bhagwat Adole                         …Applicants
                      2. Gaurav Santosh Adole
                            Versus
                      The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                  …Respondents
         Digitally
         signed by
         ARJUN                                     WITH
ARJUN    VITTHAL
VITTHAL  KUDHEKAR           ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3595 OF 2024
KUDHEKAR Date:
         2026.01.28   Balasaheb Nandu Dalbhagat                  …Applicant
         22:04:00
         +0530              Versus
                      The State of Maharashtra & Anr.            …Respondents


                      Mr. Abhijeet Khade i/b S. P. Dighe, for the Applicants.
                      Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent-State.
                      Ms. Priyanka H. Chavan, for Respondent No.2.
                      Head Constable G. S. Deokar, Ghoti Police Station, Nashik Rural,
                      present.


                                           CORAM:       MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
                                           DATED:       28 JANUARY 2026
                      PC:-


                      1.      Heard Mr. Khade, learned Counsel appearing for the

                      Applicants, Ms. Yadav, learned APP for the Respondent-State of

                      Maharashtra and Ms. Chavan, learned Counsel for Respondent

                      No.2.



                      2.      By the present Anticipatory Bail Application filed under

                      Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the




                                                    Page 1
                      Arjun
                                                902-ABA-3593-2024.DOC




Applicants are seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with CR

No.564 of 2024 registered with the Ghoti Police Station, Nashik

Rural, for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(2)

and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.



3.      As per the prosecution case, the Accused assaulted the First

Informant due to some financial dispute.



4.      Ms. Yadav, learned APP and Ms. Chavan, learned Counsel

appearing for Respondent No.2, submit that the injuries are

grievous in nature and therefore Anticipatory Bail Application be

rejected.



5.      A learned Single Judge has already granted interim

protection by Order dated 13th January 2025. The said protection

continues till date. Nothing is pointed out to show that the said

protection is misused.



6.      Thus, in the facts and circumstances and as the interim

protection is continuing for last about more than one year, case is

made out for grant of anticipatory bail.




                                Page 2
Arjun
                                                  902-ABA-3593-2024.DOC




7.      Accordingly, the following Order is passed:


                               ORDER

        (a)   In the event of arrest of the Applicant No.1 - Santosh

              Bhagwat Adole and Applicant No.2 - Gaurav Santosh

              Adole (Anticipatory Bail Application No.3593 of 2024)

              and the Applicant - Balasaheb Nandu Dalbhagat

              (Anticipatory Bail Application No.3595 of 2024), in

              connection with CR No.564 of 2024 registered with

              the Ghoti Police Station, Nashik Rural, they be

              released on bail on their furnishing PR Bond in the

              sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or two solvent

              sureties each in the like amount.

        (b)   The Applicants shall attend the concerned Police

              Station on 4th February 2026 and 5th February 2026,

              between 11:00 am to 02:00 pm and thereafter as and

              when called by the Investigating Officer till filing of

              the Charge-sheet and shall cooperate with the

              investigation.

        (c)   The Applicants shall furnish their cell phone numbers

              and residential addresses to the Investigating Officer




                                 Page 3
Arjun
                                                      902-ABA-3593-2024.DOC




               and shall keep the same updated, in case of any

               change thereto.

        (d)    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.

        (e)    The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution

               evidence and shall not contact or influence the

               Complainant or any witness in any manner.

        (f)    The Applicants shall not leave India without prior

               permission of the Court.


8.      The    Anticipatory   Bail     Applications   are    disposed   of

accordingly.



9.      This Court places on record its appreciation for the

assistance rendered by Ms. Priyanka Chavan, learned Counsel

appointed to represent the interest of the Respondent No.2.


                                              [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]




                                     Page 4
Arjun


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.