[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Birju Kishore Kumar Salla vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 4 February, 2026
2026:BHC-AS:5839 904-BA-4513-2025.DOC
Ajit Pathrikar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4513 OF 2025
Birju Kishore Kumar Salla ...Applicant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Shirish Gupte, Senior Advocate, Karan Mehta, Ashwin
Pande, Asha Mehta, Manorama Mohanty, S. K. Srivastav,
Mallikargan and Kapil Jain i/b S. K. Srivastav & Co. for
the Applicant.
Ms. Poonam P. Bhosale, APP for the State-Respondent No.1.
Mr. Bhavesh Parmar, Rahul Gaikwad and Komal Singh, for
Respondent No.2.
CORAM DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
DATED: 4th FEBRUARY 2026
PC:-
1. The Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection
with FIR No. 516 of 2025 dated 10th June 2025 registered
with the L. T. Marg Police Station, Brihanmumbai City for the
offences punishable under Sections 318 and 316 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS").
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that both the
First Informant and the Applicant were dealing in the
jewellery business and have their respective shops in a
Page 1 of 6
th
4 February 2026
::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 04/02/2026 20:52:48 :::
904-BA-4513-2025.DOC
building owned by the Applicant's father. On 18 th November
2024, the Applicant approached the First Informant and
requested antique gold ornaments, silver utensils and gems
for sale. The First Informant gave the said valuable articles
worth Rs.14 Crores to the Applicant in lieu of approval
vouchers on 21st November 2024. The Applicant signed and
affixed the stamp of his firm on the approval vouchers.
Thereafter, the Applicant returned the valuable articles to the
tune of Rs.1,47,90,584/- to the First Informant from time to
time. However, the Applicant failed to return the remaining
valuable articles worth Rs.12,76,79,471/-, nor paid the price
of the same. Despite repeated messages and requests made by
the First Informant by various means of communication, the
Applicant gave various assurances but failed to pay the money.
Hence, the First Informant made a complaint to the police,
pursuant to which the FIR was registered.
3. The Applicant made an application seeking bail before
the Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court,
Page 2 of 6
th
4 February 2026
::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 04/02/2026 20:52:48 :::
904-BA-4513-2025.DOC
Greater Bombay. However, by order dated 19th November
2025, the said application was rejected. Hence, the Applicant
is before this Court seeking the relief as prayed.
4. During the pendency of the present Bail Application, it
transpired that there is a settlement between the Applicant
and the First Informant. The First Informant, represented by
Mr. Bhavesh Parmar, learned Advocate, has tendered on
record an affidavit affirmed by the First Informant, namely Mr.
Shailesh Jain. The said affidavit is affirmed on 8 th January
2026 before a Notary Public. The Applicant, represented by
Mr. Shirish Gupte, learned senior counsel, has also tendered
on record his affidavit, which is supported by a Memorandum
of Understanding executed between the First Informant and
the Applicant.
5. It appears that the parties have settled the matter and
the Applicant has agreed to pay the necessary amount to the
First Informant in installments. The consent terms are
contained in the Memorandum of Understanding executed by
Page 3 of 6
th
4 February 2026
::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 04/02/2026 20:52:48 :::
904-BA-4513-2025.DOC
the parties on 7th January 2026 in the presence of two
witnesses. The affidavit of the Applicant, supported by the
Memorandum of Understanding, is taken on record.
6. Ms. Poonam Bhosale, learned APP, on instructions from
the Investigating Officer, has verified the signatures and the
consent given by the First Informant. She further submits that
the charges are not framed as on date.
7. Considering the aforesaid and the fact that the Applicant
is in custody since 2nd July 2025, his continued incarceration
is neither required nor desirable.
8. In view of the aforesaid, I am inclined to enlarge the
Applicant on bail and it is ordered as under:
ORDER
i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR
Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ with one or two local sureties
in the like amount;
th
4 February 2026
904-BA-4513-2025.DOC
ii) The Applicant shall attend the Police Station concerned,
on first Monday of every month between 10:00 a.m. and
12:00 p.m., till the charges are framed. He shall also attend
the Trial Court concerned on each and every date as directed,
till the conclusion of the trial, save and except if the Applicant
is exempted from appearance by orders of the Trial Court.
iii) If the Applicant has not deposited his passport, the
Applicant shall deposit the same with the concerned Police
Station, if any;
iv) The Applicant shall not leave India, without permission
of the trial Court;
v) The Applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence
or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person
concerned with the case;
vi) The Applicant shall inform his latest place of residence
and mobile contact number immediately after being released
and / or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from
th
4 February 2026
904-BA-4513-2025.DOC
time to time to the Court seized of the matter and to the
Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station;
vii) The Applicant to co-operate with the conduct of the
trial;
viii) Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
9. Application is allowed in the above terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
10. It is made clear that the observations made herein are
prima facie and are confined to this Application and the Trial
Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by
the observations made herein.
(Dr. Neela Gokhale, J)
th
4 February 2026
