Bombay High Court
SANJAY RAMDAS CHAUDHARY AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
- Bench
- R M JOSHI
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail, setting aside the earlier order rejecting it.
Summary
The appellants appealed against the rejection of their anticipatory bail application in a case involving alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellants argued that the FIR statements were uncorroborated, no independent witness saw the incident, and the alleged injuries were simple, making the Atrocities Act provisions inapplicable and the IPC offences bailable. The respondents contended that specific caste‑based abuse and assault with a weapon were alleged, warranting denial of bail. The court, referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand, held that the alleged offences were not committed in public view and that the lack of weapon identification and simple injuries did not justify denial of bail. Consequently, the court set aside the lower court’s order, granted anticipatory bail, and prescribed a bail bond of Rs.15,000 with one surety for each appellant.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are sufficiently substantiated to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the alleged offences were committed in public view as required by precedent.
- Whether the absence of an identified weapon and the nature of injuries affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 323, 324, 427, 504, 506 r/w 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- Indian Penal Code
- public view
- independent witness
- weapon identification
Judgment
49-APEAL-1070-2025.DOC
Rekha Patil
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1070 OF 2025
Sanjay Ramdas Chaudhary And Ors. …Appellants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. …Respondents
Mr. Akshay Bankapur, for the Appellants.
Mr. Ashok S. Gawai, APP, for the Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Pankaj Das, for the Respondent No.2.
CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATED: 17th FEBRUARY, 2026
PC:-
1. This appeal takes exception to the impugned order dated
15th October, 2025, passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 1518
of 2025, whereby the Anticipatory Bail Application filed by the
appellant came to be rejected in connection with Crim No. 386 of
24, registered with Panchvati Police Station, Nashik, for the
offences punishable under Sections 324, 323, 427, 504, 506 r/w
34 of the Indian Penal Code ( for short ‘IPC) and Section 3(1)(r)
(s), 3(1)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act ( for short “Atrocities Act”).
2. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that even if
statement of the first informant has made in the First Information
REKHA Report is accepted to be true, no offence under Atrocities Act can
PRAKASH
PATIL
Digitally signed by Page 1 of 4
REKHA PRAKASH
PATIL
Date: 2026.02.17
18:37:38 +0530
49-APEAL-1070-2025.DOC
be said to have been made out against the appellants. It is his
submission that since the incident has not been witnessed by any
independent person, it is not in public view as contemplated by
the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Verma
v/s State of Uttarakhand1. Insofar as allegations against appellant
No.1 is concerned, according to him, even the informant does not
specify the weapon by which the injury was caused to her. He
drew attention of this Court to the injury certificate which
indicates that injury caused to the informant to be simple in
nature. Thus, it is his argument that the offence under the
Atrocities Act is not made out and offence under IPC is bailable.
He also drew attention of the Court to the statement recorded
during the course of investigation indicating the quarrels and even
fights occurring frequently between two families on the petty
ground on throwing of garbage.
3. Learned APP and learned Counsel for the respondent No.2
oppose the application by contending that apart from the fact that
there are specific allegations against all appellants of abusing and
insulting the informant over a caste, against the appellant No.1,
there is specific allegation of causing assault with weapon. It is
their submission that since the weapon is yet to be recovered, this
is not a fit case for allowing the appeal.
4. Prima facie, perusal of the record indicates that the incident
occurred on 23rd June, 2024 is not witnessed by any independent
person. In such circumstances, as far as the allegations with
1 AIR 2020 Supreme Court 5584
Page 2 of 4
49-APEAL-1070-2025.DOC
regard to the abuses hurled by the appellants against the
informant, the judgment in the case of Hitesh Varma (supra)
would have application. Prima facie, this Court is of the view that
the offence cannot be said to have been committed in a public
view.
5. As far as the allegations against the appellant No.1 is
concerned, in the First Information Report, there is no mention as
to the weapon with which the injuries are caused. The chage-
sheet indicates that the injury certificate shows those injuries to be
simple injuries. In such circumstances, this Court finds no reason
or justification to grant anticipatory bail to the present appellants.
6. In view of the above, following order is passed;
ORDER
a) The Appeal stands allowed.
b) The impugned order dated 15th October,
2025, passed in Criminal Bail Application
No.1518 of 2025 is set aside.
c) Criminal Bail Application No.1518 of 2025
stands allowed.
d) In the event of arrest of the appellants, they
be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. bond
of Rs.15,000/- each, with one surety in the
like amount.
Page 3 of 4
49-APEAL-1070-2025.DOC
e) The appellant No.1 is directed to co-operate
in the investigation and for the purpose of
recovery, if any, he shall be treated in the
custody of the police.
7. The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
{
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…