Bombay High Court
NITESH SHANTILAL MEHTA AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the applicants subject to the conditions imposed by the court.
Summary
The applicants filed an anticipatory bail application under FIR No. 35 of 2026 for alleged offences under Sections 3(5), 316(2), 318(4) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 relating to a commercial dispute over gold weighing and cash transactions. The applicants claimed they had resolved the dispute by handing over the gold and paying the complainant, and they had complied with the interim order dated 12 June 2026, though a certificate of ‘24 Carets’ was not produced. The respondents did not contest the applicants' cooperation with the investigation or the compliance, and a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNS had been served. The court considered the nature of the offences, the applicants' willingness to cooperate, and the need to protect personal liberty, and therefore confirmed the interim protection. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with conditions of a personal bond of Rs.25,000, cooperation with the investigating agency, and a prohibition on influencing witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged commercial fraud under Sections 3(5), 316(2), 318(4) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the applicants' compliance with the interim order and cooperation with the investigation justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(2), 318(4), 3(5), 351(2), 35(3)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- pre‑arrest bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- commercial fraud
- gold weighing dispute
- personal liberty
- co‑operation with investigation
Judgment
KVM
1/4
912 - ABA 631 OF 2026.doc
Digitally
signed by
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
KANCHAN
KANCHAN VINOD
VINOD MAYEKAR
MAYEKAR Date:
2026.10.03
15:38:05
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
+0530
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 631/2026
1. NITESH SHANTILAL MEHTA
2. MUKTA NITESH MEHTA
3. SHANTILAL PANNALAL MEHTA
4. BHARAT JAIN ….. APPLICANTS
VS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. …. RESPONDENTS
Adv. Pranav Avhad a/w. Adv. Darshna Naval for the Applicants.
Ms. Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent – State.
Dr. Sujay Kantawala a/w. Adv. Aishwarya Kantawala, Adv. Rizwan
Shaikh i/b. Jeffry Caleb for the Respondent No.2.
PSI D. P. Mane, Kasturba Marg Police Station, Mumbai present.
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 1ST OCTOBER, 2026
P.C. :-
1) Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as
learned APP for the respondent – State, so also learned counsel for the
respondent no.2.
2) The applicants have filed the instant application seeking
pre-arrest bail in connection with FIR No. 35 of 2026 registered with
KVM
2/4
912 - ABA 631 OF 2026.doc
Kasturba Marg Police Station, Mumbai for the offence under Sections
3(5), 316(2), 318(4) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (for short ‘BNS’).
3) Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the
offence is registered against the applicants on the basis of the
allegations by the complainant with respect to certain business
transactions which are related to gold weighting 4.6 kg and certain
other cash transactions. He submits that although offence came to be
registered with respect to the commercial transactions, the applicants
have expressed desire to resolve the controversy, which was expressly
communicated to this Court as recorded in order dated 12 th June,
2026. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in accordance
with the readiness expressed by the applicants to handover gold and
pay certain amount to the complainant as mentioned in para no.3 of
the said order, the compliances have been done.
4) Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 does not dispute
that the compliances as per paragraph no.3 of the order dated 12 th
June, 2026 have been done, although necessary certificate of ‘24
Carets’ has not been made available. He therefore does not oppose
confirmation of interim protection.
5) Apart from above aspects, it has to be noted that although
KVM
3/4
912 - ABA 631 OF 2026.doc
offence is registered against these applicants, a notice under Section
35(3) was served upon the applicants and they have expressed
readiness to join the investigation and accordingly, it is pointed out
that the applicants have co-operated the Investigation Agency.
Learned APP does not dispute this contention.
6) Considering the nature of offence and the conduct of the
applicants in resolving the controversy as per the commitments,
mentioned in para 3 of the order dated 12 th June, 2026, at this stage,
the personal liberty of these applicants needs to be protected by
confirming the interim protection.
7) Accordingly, the interim protection granted by order
dated 12th June, 2026 is confirmed. In view of this, following order is
passed :-
ORDER
(a) Anticipatory bail application is allowed.
(b) In the event of arrest of these applicants in FIR
No.35 of 2026 registered with Kasturba Marg Police
Station, Mumbai for the offence under Sections 3(5),
316(2), 318(4) and 351(2) of the BNS, they be released
on bail on furnishing P.R.Bond of Rs.25,000/- each with
one solvent surety in the like amount.
KVM
4/4
912 - ABA 631 OF 2026.doc
(c) The applicants are directed to attend the police
station as and when called upon by the Investigating
Agency.
(d) The applicants shall extend co-operation during
investigation and trial.
(e) The applicants shall not pressurize or influence the
prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
8) Anticipatory bail application is accordingly allowed and
disposed of.
[PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.]
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.