Bombay High Court
VIJAY KAPURCHAND BAFNAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- N R BORKAR
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted as the applicant’s involvement was established on a prima facie basis.
Summary
The applicant, a reputed jeweller, filed an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in a case involving alleged misappropriation of gold bracelets weighing 1517.6 grams, alleged under Sections 3(5), 316(5) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution presented CCTV footage and claimed the applicant purchased 1100 grams of gold from a co‑accused, asserting a prima facie case. The applicant argued the case was not probable, he had no criminal antecedents, and the informant would not have handed over such gold without verification. The court examined the investigation records, found sufficient prima facie evidence of the applicant’s involvement, and concluded that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the prima facie evidence of his involvement in the alleged gold misappropriation.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(5), 318(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- gold misappropriation
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- Section 3(5)
- Section 316(5)
- Section 318(4)
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
1 914-ABA 427-26.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.427 OF 2026
Vijay Kapurchand Bafna … Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents
-----
Mr. R. R. Gupta for the Applicant.
Mr. B. V. Holambe Patil, APP for Respondent No.1-State.
Ms. Kinjal Khandelwal for Respondent No.2.
PI Sambhaji Gurav, V. P. Road PS is present.
-----
CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE : 27TH FEBRUARY 2026
P.C. :
1. This is an Application for anticipatory bail.
Digitally
signed by
MUGDHA
MUGDHA MANOJ
MANOJ PARANJAPE
PARANJAPE Date:
2. The Applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.1822 of 2025
2026.02.28
15:22:01
+0530 registered with V. P. Road Police Station for the offences punishable under
Sections 3(5), 316(5), 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that the first informant is involved
in the business of gold. It is alleged that from 16 th December 2025 to 27th
December 2025 co-accused in the present crime obtained gold bracelets
weighing 1517.600 grams from the first informant under the pretext of
selling the same to a businessman from Indore and misappropriated the
said gold bracelets. During the investigation of the present crime, they
disclosed that they sold the gold bracelets to the present Applicant
through co-accused Rajesh Dhaka.
Mugdha 1 of 3
2 914-ABA 427-26.doc
4. I have heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant, Learned APP for
Respondent No.1-State and Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2.
5. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the case of the
prosecution is not probable as it is unlikely that the first informant would
hand over 1517.600 grams of gold bracelets to co-accused without
verifying their credentials. It is submitted that the Applicant is a reputed
jeweller. It is submitted that there are no other criminal antecedents
against the present Applicant.
6. On the other hand, Learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and
Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 submit that during the course of
investigation the prosecution has collected CCTV footage which shows the
involvement of the Applicant in crime in question. It is submitted that
custodial interrogation of the Applicant is necessary to recover the gold in
question. It is further submitted that the Applicant in Anticipatory Bail
Application No.307 of 2026, who is also a co-accused in the present crime,
has stated that he sold the gold in question, which was brought by co-
accused Rajesh Dhaka to the present Applicant and got a commission of
Rs.55,000/-. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the
Applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.
7. I have perused the papers of investigation. From the papers of
investigation, prima-facie it appears that the Applicant has purchased
1100 gram of gold from co-accused Rajesh Dhaka. Considering the overall
Mugdha 2 of 3
3 914-ABA 427-26.doc
facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to release the Applicant on
anticipatory bail. Hence, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is
rejected.
(N.R. BORKAR, J.)
Mugdha 3 of 3
Checking your session…