Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SHIVAM NANDLAL YADAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

Disposal
Allowed

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail, finding prima facie merit in the applicant’s claim that he acted solely as an employee and was not involved in any financial transaction, and held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

Summary

The applicant, Shivam Nandlal Yadav, an employee of Medex Medical System Company, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, fearing arrest in Crime No. 86 of 2026 involving alleged cheating under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the informant was cheated by the company's owner, but the applicant contended he only acted as a sales liaison and did not handle any financial transactions. The court found no material indicating the applicant’s participation in the alleged financial fraud and held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail on condition of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties and imposed standard bail conditions. The application was disposed with the bail order.

Issues considered

  • Whether the applicant is liable to be arrested in connection with the alleged cheating under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
  • Whether anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 should be granted to the applicant.
  • Whether custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary in the present case.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 482
  • criminal procedure
  • employee liability
  • cheating
  • bail conditions
  • Indian criminal law

Judgment

                                                                           17 - ABA - 480 - 2026.doc


                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
VAIBHAV
RAMESH                                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
JADHAV
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV RAMESH
JADHAV
Date: 2026.10.07
10:24:17 +0530              CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 480 OF 2026

                      Shivam Nandlal Yadav                            … Applicant
                                   Versus.
                      The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                 … Respondents

                                                      --------
                      Mr. Vaibhav Gaikwad with Mr. Samrat hajare for the
                      Applicant.
                      Dr. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State.
                      A. S. Kanade, Head Constable, Ishwarpur Police Station, is
                      present.

                                                      -------
                                                     CORAM       : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

                                                     DATED       : OCTOBER 6, 2026
                      P.C.:


                      1.      Heard, Mr. Vaibhav Gaikwad, learned Advocate for the Applicant

                      and Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the State.


                      2.      By the present Application filed under Section 482 of the

                      Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Applicant seeks pre-

                      arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 86 of

                      2026 registered at Islampur Police Station, Sangli, for offences

                      punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

                      Sanhita, 2023.


                      3.      Mr. Vaibhav Gaikwad, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states




                      VRJ                                                                         1
                                                      17 - ABA - 480 - 2026.doc


that there are three (3) accused in Crime No. 86 of 2026. He submits

that the Applicant is Accused No. 3. Accused No. 1 (Ashwin Raut) is the

owner of Medex Medical System Company. Accused No. 2 (Kundan

Harishchandra Singh) is an employee of Accused No. 1 and so is the

Applicant.


4.    Mr. Vaibhav Gaikwad, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states

that the Applicant (Accused No. 3) is an employee of Accused No. 1,

working in the firm “Medex Medical System Company” of Accused No.

1. He submits that in the course of his duties and on instructions from

Accused No. 1, the Applicant met the Informant (Dr. Sachin

Sangrulkar), who was interested in buying machines dealt in and

supplied by Accused No. 1. He further submits that upon contacting the

Informant, the Applicant informed the Informant about the merchandise

supplied and dealt in by Accused No. 1. Upon the Informant's interest in

purchasing certain machines from Accused No. 1, the Informant directly

dealt with Accused No. 1. To elobarate, Mr. Vaibhav Gaikwad, learned

Advocate for the Applicant, states that all the transactions of purchase,

sale and the money transactions are and were between Accused No. 1

and the Informant. He submits that the Applicant has neither dealt with

any money transaction nor has received any amount from the sale of

the machines by Accused No. 1 to the Informant.


5.    Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the State, submits that the FIR



VRJ                                                                          2
                                                      17 - ABA - 480 - 2026.doc


discloses that the Applicant was employed by Accused No. 1. She

further submits that Crime No. 86 of 2026, lodged by the Informant,

cleary indicates that the Informant was cheated by Accused No. 1.


6.    Perused the records with the assistance of the learned Advocates.


7.    The Applicant, being the employee of Accused No. 1, is a fact not

contested by Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the State. Mr. Vaibhav

Gaikwad, learned Advocate for the Applicant, is categorical in his

submission that the Applicant has performed his duties for Accused No.

1 in his capacity as an employee of Accused No. 1 and in no other

capacity.


8.    No material is placed in this Application or pointed out to

indicate that the Applicant has been involved in any financial

transaction with the Informant.


9.    In view of the above, I find prima facie merit in the submissions

of Mr. Vaibhav Gaikwad, learned Advocate for the Applicant, that the

Applicant acted as an employee of Accused No. 1 while dealing with the

Informant.


10.     In the above circumstances, custodial interrogation of the

Applicant is not necessary in Crime No. 86 of 2026.


11.   This Application is, therefore, allowed on the following terms:




VRJ                                                                          3
                                                      17 - ABA - 480 - 2026.doc


      a)    In the event of arrest of the Applicant in Crime No. 86 of

      2026 registered with Islampur Police Station, Sangli, the

      Applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a PR bond in

      the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with two sureties in the like amount to

      the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, Islampur Police

      Station.


      b)    The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

      inducement, threat or promise to any person/s acquainted with

      the facts of the case to dissuade such person/s from disclosing the

      facts to the Court or any police officer.


      c)    Applicant shall not tamper with evidence in any manner.


      d)    The Applicant shall appear and report to the Investigating

      Officer, Islampur Police Station, on 12 th , 13th , 14th    and 15th

      October 2026 from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and as and when

      required by the Investigating Officer. The Applicant shall

      cooperate with the Investigating Officer in the process of

      investigation of Crime No. 86 of 2026.


12.   Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 480 of 2026 is

disposed.




                                            (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)



VRJ                                                                          4


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.