RAJRISHI RAJBINDRASINGH BINDAWATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

SA_MANDAWGAD                                                901 BA 2110-26.DOC


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
           CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2110 OF 2026

Rajrushi Rajendrasingh Bidawat                             … Applicant
      V/S.
The State of Maharashtra                                 … Respondent


Mr. Priyal Sarda a/w. Shubham S. Sejpal i/by Shubham Waphare,
for the applicant.
Mr. Vinod Chate, APP for Respondent–State.


                            CORAM:        SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
                            DATED :       16th SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :-

1.        Heard. Perused the record.

2.        Mr. Sarda, learned counsel for the applicant, seeks leave to
amend to correct the name of the applicant in the cause-title of the
application. Leave to amend is granted. Amendment to be carried
out forthwith.

3.        The applicant seeking his release on bail in connection with
Crime No. I-378 of 2024, registered with Worli Police Station,
Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 105(1), 281,
125(b), 238, 324(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with
Sections 184, 185, 134(a), 134(b), 187, 122/183 of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, along with Sections 146/196, 115(7)/190,
100(2)/177, 92/177(a) of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989,
and Sections 9(1)/177, 17/177(a), 92/177, 12(1)(e)/177(a) of the
Motor Vehicle Driving Rules.

4.        The prosecution case is that, at the time of the incident, the
applicant was working as driver with Accused No.1-Mr. Rajesh
                                 Page 1 of 5
SA_MANDAWGAD                                            901 BA 2110-26.DOC


Damji Shah (A1), who is father of Accused No.3 - Mihir Shah (A3).
On 07.07.2024, the applicant drove A3 to a hotel, at Juhu. There,
A3 and his three friends, had consumed liquor. Thereafter, the
applicant drove A3 and his friends up to Borivali and, dropped the
three friends there. Further, the applicant drove A3 to his
residence. But, instead of going home, at about 02:30 hours, they
went to Marine Drive. At about 05:10 hours, they left from Marine
Drive. Meanwhile, at about 04:45 hours, A3 sat at the driver’s seat
and the applicant sat besides A3, on the left. From there, A3 drove
the car. When the car arrived in front of CJ House, on Dr. Annie
Besant Road, Worli, A3 gave a forcible dash to a two-wheeler
which was proceeding ahead of the car. The informant was riding
that bike and his wife was a pillion. As a result, the informant fell
on the road and his wife got entangled in the bonnet and left front
wheel of the car. However, A3 did not stop the car and dragged
that woman to a long distance. As a result, the informant and his
wife sustained serious injuries and his wife died. Therefore, the
aforesaid crime came to be registered. It is alleged that the
applicant did not inform the incident to police nor made any effort
to get urgent medical help for the victims. Additionally, the
applicant alongwith A1 helped A3 to flee from the spot. Therefore,
the applicant came to be arrested. Investigation led to filing of
charge-sheet.

5.    Mr. Sarda, learned Counsel for the applicant, submitted that
the incident had occurred all of a sudden. The applicant cannot
charged for the offence of Section 105 nor there is evidence to that
effect. The case against the applicant and A1 is similar. The latter
is released on bail. Therefore, the principle of parity is applicable
in this case. Further, he submitted that the applicant is behind the

                              Page 2 of 5
SA_MANDAWGAD                                            901 BA 2110-26.DOC


bars for the more than two years. The charge is recently framed on
10.06.2026, but, the trial has not sufficiently advanced. Therefore,
the applicant is entitled for bail on the ground of prolonged
incarceration.

6.    In reply, Mr. Chate, learned APP for the Respondent-State,
submitted that the incident occurred on account that the applicant
gave the car to A3 to drive, who was drunk. Consequently, this
incident occurred. However, the applicant did not help the victims
nor reported the matter to the police. Instead, he tried to screen
A3 by helping him to flee away. Therefore, bail be refused.

7.    I have considered the submissions. Prima facie, it appears
that, although A3 was drunk, the applicant allowed him to drive
the car. However, the applicant on his own did not tell A3 to drive
the car. In the charge-sheet, the applicant is not directly blamed
for the alleged offence of Section 105 of BNS. All that is alleged is
that, A3 drove the car at high speed, in a rash and negligent
manner and, caused the accident resulting into injuries to the
informant and death of his wife. Therefore, whether the said act of
the applicant is an offence punishable u/S.105 BNS, i.e., causing
culpable homicide not amounting to murder, is a question of trial.
Both A1 and the applicant have been charged for the act of helping
A3 to flee from the spot. The A1 is released on bail. The applicant
is behind bars for the last two years. Mr. Chate, learned APP,
states that hearing of the witnesses is yet to commence. The
prosecution has cited 54 witnesses. Even if the prosecution
examines half of them, the trial will take a considerable time to
conclude. The applicant is not likely to abscond and tamper with
the prosecution witnesses. He has no criminal antecedents.


                              Page 3 of 5
SA_MANDAWGAD                                               901 BA 2110-26.DOC


8.    In the wake of above, I am inclined to release the applicant
on bail. Hence, the following Order:

      (i)      The applicant - Rajrushi Rajendrasingh Bidawat be
               released on bail in the aforesaid FIR registered with
               Worli Police Station, Mumbai, on his executing P.R.
               Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two
               sureties in the like amount.

      (ii)     The applicant shall mark his attendance at Worli
               Police Station, Mumbai, on 1st and 16th day of each
               calendar month between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. till
               conclusion of the trial.

      (iii)    The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings
               before the jurisdictional Court unless exempted by the
               said Court, for the reasons to be recorded in writing.

      (iv)     The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
               evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence
               the prosecution witnesses to prevent them from
               deposing against him.

      (v)      On being released from jail, the applicant shall furnish
               his contact number and residential address to the
               Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated in
               case there is any change.

      (vi)     The applicant shall not indulge in identical activities
               for which he has been arraigned in this case.




                                 Page 4 of 5
                    SA_MANDAWGAD                                               901 BA 2110-26.DOC


                          (vii) It is clarified that any observation made in the present
                                   Order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail
                                   Application and should not influence the outcome of
                                   the trial and also not be taken as an expression of
                                   opinion on the merits of the case.

                    9.    Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.



       Digitally
       signed by
                                                                  (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)
       PREETI
PREETI HEERO
HEERO JAYANI
JAYANI Date:
       2026.09.19
       11:40:36
       +0530




                                                    Page 5 of 5