Raghu Rajan Johnson vs State Of Maharashtra on 6 April, 2026

Author: R.N. Laddha

Bench: R.N. Laddha

2026:BHC-AS:16284 Digitally
signed by
CHITRA
CHITRA SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2026.04.06
19:24:38

Chitra Sonawane. +0530
26-ABA-861-2026.docx

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Anticipatory Bail Application No.861 of 2026

Raghu Rajan Johnson
Age: 40 years, Occu: Waiter,
Having address at: Room No.302,
Mahalaxmi Apartment, Third Floor,
Godhdev Gao, Vitthal Mandir Gali,
Bhayandar East, Thane: 401105 ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(Through Senior Inspector of Police
Kashimira Police Station,
Mira-Bhayander, Vasai-Virar Police
Commissionerate, Mira Bhayandar,
Thane - 401107 ... Respondent
----
Mr ST Pandey, a/w Ms Kajal Upadhyay, Mr Imran, Mr Deepak
Singh and Ms Deepika Jaiswal,i/b. ST Pandey, for the applicant.
Mr Mayur Sonavane, APP, for the respondent/ State.
PSI Rajesh Kini, Kashimira Police Station.
----
Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 6 April 2026.
P.C.:

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in
connection with CR No.389 of 2025, registered at Kashimira
Police Station, Thane, for the offences punishable under

Page 1 of 6
__________________________________________________

6 April 2026

::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/04/2026 21:27:51 :::
Chitra Sonawane. 26-ABA-861-2026.docx

Sections 110, 296, 54 and 49 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. The prosecution's case is that on 3 September 2025, at
approximately 23:50 hours, acting upon confidential
information, a raid on Tarzan Orchestra Bar was conducted.
During the course of the raid, it was allegedly discovered that
the manager and cashier present at the bar, acting at the behest
of the owners and operators for monetary gain, induced and
encouraged the female singers employed therein to wear short
and tight-fitting attire. It is further alleged that these women
were made to keep parts of their bodies exposed and were
compelled to descend from the designated stage area in order
to perform obscene gestures so as to attract customers.

3. The prosecution further alleges that the manager, cashier,
steward, and waiter, acting in concert with the owners and
operators of the establishment, conspired to construct and
employ a concealed enclosure lacking proper ventilation,
potable water, and illumination, with intent to sequestering
female vocal performers engaged at the premises. It is further
alleged that, notwithstanding their knowledge that such
confinement could imperil human life, the accused wrongfully
detained five women within the said enclosure. The
prosecution alleges that the present applicant was functioning

Page 2 of 6
__________________________________________________

6 April 2026

::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/04/2026 21:27:51 :::
Chitra Sonawane. 26-ABA-861-2026.docx

in the capacity of Manager of the establishment at the material
time.

4. Mr ST Pandey, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the
applicant, asserting the applicant's innocence, contends that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present crime. It is
submitted that the applicant was merely employed as a waiter
and did not exercise managerial authority or decision-making
power in the affairs of the establishment. The execution of the
leave and license agreement in the applicant's name, it is
argued, was effected solely at the behest and under the
instructions of the actual management. The learned Counsel
further submits that the applicant was in his native place at the
locus of the alleged incident, having become aware of the
registration of the FIR only upon his return to Mumbai to
resume employment. It is submitted that co-accused persons,
attributed with more substantive and grave roles in the alleged
offence, have already been enlarged on bail. The learned
Counsel also points out that no recovery or discovery remains
to be effected from the applicant, rendering custodial
interrogation unnecessary. The applicant is ready to abide by
the conditions this Court may deem fit to impose.

5. On the other hand, Mr Mayur Sonavane, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/

Page 3 of 6
__________________________________________________

6 April 2026

::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/04/2026 21:27:51 :::
Chitra Sonawane. 26-ABA-861-2026.docx

State, opposes the applicant's request for bail. It is submitted
that the offence alleged is of a grave and serious nature. The
applicant is stated to have executed the leave-and-license
agreement in respect of the establishment. The investigation is
ongoing, and it is apprehended that grant of pre-arrest bail may
enable the applicant to tamper with evidence or influence
witnesses. However, the learned APP fairly acknowledges that
the investigation has reached completion and that a charge
sheet is to be filed in due course.

6. This Court has given anxious consideration to the rival
contentions and perused the records.

7. From a perusal of the records, it appears that the present
applicant was not named in the FIR. It is further revealed that,
at the initial stage, the prosecution proceeded on an assumption
that the applicant was functioning as a manager of the
concerned establishment. However, during the course of
remand proceedings before the learned Magistrate, the
prosecution altered its stand and submitted that one Siddharth
was, in fact, the manager of the said establishment, who has
since been enlarged on bail. The prosecution has also
attributed ownership of the establishment to one Raman. In
this backdrop, save and except a bald and unsubstantiated
assertion, there is no material on record to prima facie

Page 4 of 6
__________________________________________________

6 April 2026

::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/04/2026 21:27:51 :::
Chitra Sonawane. 26-ABA-861-2026.docx

demonstrate the involvement or complicity of present applicant
in the alleged offence. The allegations levelled against applicant
are conspicuously vague and bereft of the requisite particulars
necessary to establish a direct nexus with the crime in question.
It is also pertinent to note that the co-accused, against whom
comparatively graver and more specific allegations have been
levelled, have already been granted bail. Additionally, the
investigation appears to have reached its culmination, and
nothing further remains to be recovered or discovered at the
instance of the applicant. The prosecution has indicated that
the charge sheet is likely to be filed shortly, obviating the
necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicant at this
stage.

8. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and having regard
to the totality of the material on record, this Court is inclined
to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant. Hence, the following
order:
ORDER

(i) In the event of the applicant's arrest in CR No.389 of 2025, registered at Kashimira Police Station, Thane, he shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or

__________________________________________________

6 April 2026

Chitra Sonawane. 26-ABA-861-2026.docx

more sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required till the filing of the charge sheet.

(iii) The applicant, himself or through any other person, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.

9. The application stands disposed of accordingly.

10. It is clarified that the observations set out herein are of a prima facie nature and are made solely for the purpose of deciding the present application.

[ R.N. Laddha, J. ]

__________________________________________________

6 April 2026