[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Rajan Magan Dhole And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 13 May, 2026
15-ABA-1277-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1277 OF 2026
Rajan Magan Dhole and Ors. ... Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
--------------------
Mr. Meghashyam Kocharekar, for the Applicants.
Mr. Dinesh J. Haldankar, A.P.P., for the Respondent-State.
--------------------
CORAM : SANDESH D. PATIL, J.
DATE : 13 th MAY, 2026.
(VACATION COURT)
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr. Meghashyam Kocharekar, learned Counsel for the
Applicants and Mr. Dinesh J. Haldankar, learned A.P.P. for the
Respondent-State. At the outset Mr. Meghashyam Kocharekar, learned
Counsel for the Applicants had submitted that the Applicant No.3 was
arrested, and hence, the present Application qua Applicant No.3 is not
pressed by him. The present Application is thus pressed only qua
Applicant No.1 and Applicant No.2.
Manisha 1/4
::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:48:27 :::
15-ABA-1277-2026.doc
2. Mr. Meghashyam Kocharekar, learned Counsel for the
Applicants states that the F.I.R. No.0176 of 2026 registered with
Padgha, Thane Rural Police Station was lodged on 05/03/2026 whereas
the incident in question had occurred as per the case of the
prosecution on 04/03/2026 at 6:30 p.m. He further states that the
incident occurred because of quarrel between two neighbours. He
states that the parties namely the Complainant as well as the Accused
persons are from the same clan and they are cousins. He states that the
entire incident started when a glass bottle was broken. Learned
Counsel states that thereafter certain verbal abuses and scuffle took
place. However, he states that the Complainant's case is that it is only
after he went to the home that his mother and father told him that
somebody had snatched their gold ornaments. He states that since the
parties are related to each other there is no question of the mother and
father of the parties not knowing their names. He states that this is an
after thought of the Complainant and hence the Applicants are entitled
to be released on anticipatory bail.
Manisha 2/4
::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:48:27 :::
15-ABA-1277-2026.doc
3. Learned A.P.P. states that this is a case of dacoity and that the
Applicants have forcefully snatched the gold ornaments. He states that
there is no case made out for grant of anticipatory bail.
4. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, I
find merit in the submission of Mr. Meghashyam Kocharekar, learned
Counsel for the Applicants that the F.I.R. appears to be an after
thought. It is very unlikely that the parties who are related to each
other being cousins did not know the names of the persons who had
snatched the gold ornaments. The case also appears to have stemmed
out of a dispute relating to a glass bottle, and that, prima facie it is very
unlikely that the offence under Section 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 is said to have been made.
5. In the aforesaid premise, issue Notice to the Respondents
returnable on 25/06/2026.
Manisha 3/4
::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:48:27 :::
15-ABA-1277-2026.doc
6. In the meantime, till the next date, the Applicants are granted
interim protection on the following terms and conditions:
ORDER
(i) In the event of arrest, the Applicants- Mr. Rajan Magan
Dhole, Mr. Anuj Devanand Dhole and Mr. Nitesh @ Pintya
Raghunath Jadhav be released on bail in connection with C.R.
No.176/2026 registered with Padgha Police Station under
Sections 310(2), 333, 351(2), 351(3) and 352 of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount;
(ii) The Applicants shall report to the Investigating Officer of
the concerned Police Station on 21 st May, 2026, 25th May, 2026
and 28th May, 2026 from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
7. Stand over to 25th June, 2026.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)
