Bombay High Court
TUSHAR @ BALAJI TANAJI NAGTILAK AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, holding that custodial interrogation was not necessary and bail could be granted with conditions.
Summary
The applicants, Tushar @ Balaji Tanaji Nagtilak and Vishal Tanaji Nagtilak, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, fearing arrest in Crime No. 525 of 2026, which alleges assault on Respondent No. 2 during a sand‑extraction contract dispute. The prosecution alleged that the applicants assaulted the complainant with a stick and other weapons, invoking numerous offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicants contended that they were themselves victims of a prior assault (FIR No. 524 of 2026) and that the current case was a retaliatory move by the complainant. The court examined the medical evidence showing grievous injuries to Applicant No. 1 and found that the material indicated the applicants were not the primary aggressors. Considering the circumstances and the nature of the dispute, the court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary and granted anticipatory bail with strict conditions, ordering the applicants to report to the investigating officer and to refrain from tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 in view of the seriousness of the offences alleged under the BNS, 2023.
- Whether the circumstances of the sand‑extraction dispute and the evidence of injuries justify the discharge of the applicants on bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 308(2), 308(4), 324(4), 351(1), 351(2), 352, 61(2)(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- BNSS 2023
- BNS 2023
- sand extraction dispute
- assault
- grievous injury
- criminal procedure
Judgment
1/7
919-ABA-568-2026 (CR).DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.568 OF 2026
1. Tushar @ Balaji Tanaji Nagtilak
2. Vishal Tanaji Nagtilak ….Applicants
Versus.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ....Respondents
-----
Mr. Mahadeo Choudhari, for Applicants.
Mr. S. H. Yadav, A.P.P., for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 – State.
Mr. Piyush Toshnival (Through VC), for Respondent No.2 (Complainant).
-------
Digitally
signed by
SHANTANU
SHANTANU SHANKARSA
SHANKARSA DHUDUM
DHUDUM Date:
2026.10.01
20:13:32
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
+0530
DATE : 30th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C.
1. Heard, Mr. Mahadeo Choudhari, learned Advocate for the
Applicants, Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 –
State, and Mr. Piyush Toshniwal, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
2. By the present Application filed under Section 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), the
Applicants seek pre-arrest bail, apprehending arrest in connection with
Crime No. 525 of 2026 registered with Pandharpur Police Station, District
Shantanu S. Dhudum
2/7
919-ABA-568-2026 (CR).DOC
Solapur, for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 189(2),
190, 191(2), 191(3), 324(4), 351(1), 351(2), 352, 118(2), 61(2)(a),
308(2) and 308(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short,
“BNS”).
3. Mr. Mahadeo Choudhari, learned Advocate for the Applicants,
states that there are seven (7) Accused in Crime No. 525 of 2026. He states
that Applicant No. 1 is Accused No. 1 and Applicant No. 2 is Accused No. 2
in the present crime.
4. In brief, the prosecution case is that on 13.07.2026, at about
10:00 p.m., while Respondent No. 2 was travelling in a car with Pratap
Manik Mane and Arvind Adkale towards Nandore, another car intercepted
their vehicle near Bitargaon Pati at Suste. Following a dispute over the
sand excavation contract, Applicant No. 1 assaulted Respondent No. 2 on
the head with a “sattur”. When Respondent No. 2 tried to block the blow
with his hand, the weapon struck his right hand near the little finger,
resulting in fractures to two fingers of his right hand. Applicant No. 2
assaulted Respondent No. 2 on his hands and back with a stick. Accused
No. 4 (Atul Popat Chavan) also assaulted Respondent No. 2 in connection
with the said dispute. That all the accused persons broke the glass of the
car in which Respondent No. 2 was travelling, thereby damaging the
vehicle.
Shantanu S. Dhudum
3/7
919-ABA-568-2026 (CR).DOC
5. Mr. Mahadeo Choudhari, learned Advocate for the Applicants,
submits that Applicant No. 1 is himself a victim of a brutal assault at the
hands of Respondent No. 2, which resulted in severe grievous injuries, as
evidenced by the medical certificate of Applicant No. 1 (at Exhibit-F
“Colly.”, from page Nos. 71 to 105 of the paper-book). He submits that the
assault on Applicant No. 1 by Respondent No. 2 and his accomplices was
on the hand, leg, ribs and wrist of Applicant No. 1, resulting in fractures
and actual separation of many of his bones. He submits that the Applicant
has filed a complaint against Respondent No. 2 and his accomplices, which
is registered as F.I.R. bearing No. 524 of 2026. He submits that as a
counterblast, Respondent No. 2 has registered Crime No. 525 of 2026
against Applicant No. 1 and Applicant No. 2. He submits that Applicant No.
1 is the victim of the sand mafia, of which Respondent No. 2 and the
assailants are part. He submits that Applicant No. 2, i.e. the brother and
other family members of the Applicants, have been dragged into Crime No.
525 of 2026 with the sole motive of pressurising the Applicants and
covering up the assault by Respondent No. 2 and the other assailants,
which took place on 13th July, 2026. He states that Applicant No. 1, after
the assault, was admitted to the hospital and has now been discharged.
6. Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3 –
State, submits that the offence in Crime No. 525 of 2026 is a serious
offence. Referring to the narration in the F.I.R., he submits that the incident
appears to have arisen out of a dispute over sand extraction.
Shantanu S. Dhudum
4/7
919-ABA-568-2026 (CR).DOC
7. Mr. Piyush Toshniwal, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2,
submits that Applicant No. 1 assaulted Respondent No. 2 on the head and
on the little finger, resulting in grievous injury to the little finger of
Respondent No. 2. He further submits that Applicant No. 2 assaulted
Respondent No. 2 on the back with a stick. He further submits that the
Applicants have systematically planned an assault on Respondent No. 2.
8. Perused the record with the assistance of the learned Advocates
for the parties.
9. The Crime No. 525 of 2026 refers to a dispute between the
parties regarding a tender for sand extraction.
10. Applicant No. 1 lodged an F.I.R. on 16th July, 2026, at 17:15
hours against Respondent No. 2 and others, alleging that on 13 th July,
2026, Respondent No. 2 and the other Accused named in his F.I.R.
assaulted Applicant No. 1, which is registered as Crime No. 524 of 2026.
Applicant No. 1 has suffered grievous injuries, including fractures to his
hand, ribs, wrist, legs and fingers, as submitted by Mr. Mahadeo
Choudhari, learned Advocate for the Applicants, by relying on the
documents at Exhibit-F “Colly.” The Respondents do not contest the said
document at Exhibit-F “Colly.” and the injuries to Applicant No. 1.
Shantanu S. Dhudum
5/7
919-ABA-568-2026 (CR).DOC
11. Applicant No. 2 is alleged to have assaulted Respondent No. 2
with a stick on his back. The injury certificate of Respondent No. 2 does not
indicate any injuries on the back of Respondent No. 2.
12. Though the injury certificate of Respondent No. 2 indicates an
injury to the frontal area caused by a hard and blunt object and an injury
to the right little finger, when compared with the alleged assault by the
Applicants on 13th July, 2026, the injuries to Applicant No. 1 are prima
facie, grievous and indicate that Applicant No. 1 was the victim of the
assault on 13th July, 2026. The seriousness of the injuries to Applicant No.
1 is reflected in the certificates at “Exhibit-F Colly.”
13. Be that as it may, prima facie, the material placed in the file of
this Application indicates that Applicant No. 1 was assaulted on 13 th July,
2026.
14. Considering the overall circumstances and the dispute relating to
a tender for sand, as mentioned in the narration of F.I.R. No. 525 of 2026,
the custodial interrogation of the Applicants in the said crime is not
necessary.
15. In view of the above, this Application is allowed on the following
conditions:
ORDER
Shantanu S. Dhudum
6/7
919-ABA-568-2026 (CR).DOC
A) In the event of arrest of the Applicants – (1) Tushar @
Balaji Tanaji Nagtilak and (2) Vishal Tanaji Nagtilak, in
connection with Crime No. 525 of 2026 registered with
Pandharpur Police Station, District Solapur, the Applicants
shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum
of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each, with one
or two solvent sureties in the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, Pandharpur Police
Station, District Solapur.
B) Applicant No. 1 shall appear and report to the Investigating
Officer on 5th October, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00
p.m., and thereafter as and when required by the
Investigating Officer.
C) Applicant No. 2 shall report to the Investigating Officer,
Pandharpur Police Station, District Solapur, on 5th , 6th , 7th ,
8th and 9th October, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.,
and thereafter as and when required by the Investigating
Officer investigating Crime No. 525 of 2026.
D) The Applicants shall co-operate with the investigation in
Crime No. 525 of 2026.
Shantanu S. Dhudum
7/7
919-ABA-568-2026 (CR).DOC
E) The Applicants 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.
F) The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not influence the witnesses in any
manner.
G) The Applicants shall provide the Investigating Officer with
their residential addresses along with proof thereof and
their contact numbers and shall inform the Investigating
Officer of any changes to this information from time to
time.
16. Anticipatory Bail Application No.568 of 2026 is disposed.
( ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Shantanu S. Dhudum
Checking your session…