Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

AMIT KUMAR RAMBHAU @ RAMBABU YADAVversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

Bail is granted to the applicant subject to a PR bond of Rs.25,000 with sureties and conditions of non‑tampering with evidence and attendance as required.

Summary

The applicant, Amit Kumar Rambhau, was arrested in connection with a counterfeiting case (Crime No.965 of 2024) under Sections 180 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, after police recovered counterfeit notes worth Rs.1,50,000. He has been in custody for more than one year and four months, has no prior criminal record, and the trial has not progressed, with charges not yet framed. The applicant sought regular bail, arguing that the prolonged detention was unjustified, while the State opposed bail on grounds of the seriousness of the offence and the risk of absconding or witness tampering. The Court, after hearing both sides, noted the lack of antecedents, the delay in trial, and the absence of a charge sheet, and ordered the release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a PR bond of Rs.25,000 with one or two solvent sureties, subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. The trial court was directed to continue the trial on its merits without being influenced by this order.

Issues considered

  • The propriety of granting bail to a person accused of counterfeiting under Sections 180 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 given the nature of the offence.
  • Whether the prolonged pre‑trial detention of more than one year and four months warrants bail.
  • The risk of the accused absconding or tampering with witnesses versus his right to liberty.
  • The absence of a framed charge and lack of progress in the trial as factors influencing bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • pre‑trial detention
  • counterfeiting
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • criminal procedure
  • surety bond
  • witness tampering

Judgment

                                                                                            18-BA-2612-2025.doc



                              N.S.Kamble


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                       CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2612 OF 2025


                              Amit Kumar Rambhau                                        … Applicant
                              @ Rambabu Yadav
                                    Versus

NILAM
           Digitally signed
        by NILAM
                              The State of Maharashtra                                  … Respondent
        SANTOSH
SANTOSH KAMBLE
KAMBLE Date: 2026.02.16
        12:41:25 +0530
                              ________________________________________________________
                              Ms.Swarali Joglekar, for the Applicant.
                              Mr.B.B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State.
                              Mr.S.Y. Rajput, GPSI, Yavat Police Station, Pune Rural.
                              ________________________________________________________
                                                                 CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
                                                                 DATE          : 12th FEBRUARY 2026

                              P.C. :

                              .            By this Application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in

                              Crime No.965 of 2024 registered with Yavat Police Station, Pune, for the

                              offences punishable under Sections 180 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

                              Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’ for short).

                              2.           It is prosecution’s case that on secret information, police

                              apprehended the Applicant and          police found counterfeited notes of

                              Rs.1,50,000/- in his possession.



                                                                 Page 1 of 3
                                                                18-BA-2612-2025.doc



N.S.Kamble


3.           It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the

Applicant is behind bars for more than one year and four months. The

maximum sentence for the offences applied against the Applicant is of seven

years. The Applicant has no antecedents. There is no progress in trial. It

may take time to conclude the trial, and requested to allow the Application.

4.           It is contention of learned APP that, the Applicant was found

with counterfeited notes of Rs.1,50,000/- in his possession. The act of the

Applicant is attack on economy of this country. If the Applicant released on

bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses, and requested to

reject the Application.

5.           I have heard both learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and

documents produced on record.

6.           The Applicant is behind bars for more than one year and four

months. The Applicant has no antecedents. There is no progress in trial. It

may take time to conclude the trial. Charge is not framed.

7.           Considering these facts, I pass following order.

                                    ORDER

              (i)         The Applicant-Amit Kumar Rambhau @ Rambabu

              Yadav be released on bail in Crime No.965 of 2024 registered




                                    Page 2 of 3
                                                               18-BA-2612-2025.doc



N.S.Kamble


             with Yavat Police Station, Pune, on furnishing PR bond of

             Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

             (ii)     The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence

             and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.

             (iii)    The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own

             merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the

             observations made in this order.

             (iv)     The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police

             Station as and when required.

             (v)      Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.



                                                (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)




                                  Page 3 of 3


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.