20-ABA-140-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 140 OF 2026 Sanjay Dattaram Salgaonkar … Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra And Anr. … Respondents ---- Mr. Sudarshan Patil a/w Ruturaj Sawardekar and Anita Parit, for the Applicant. Dr. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent – State. Mr. Ajitkumar Naikude, Sub Inspector, Kagal – Kollhapur, is present. ------- CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 19th August, 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Sudarshan Patil, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the Respondent – State. 2. On 18.03.2026, the following order was passed :- 1. Present Application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in respect of F.I.R. No. 08 of 2026, dated 18th January 2026, registered with State Excise Department Kagal, District Kolhapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 65(a), (b), (d), (e), 81, 83, 90, 108 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, Sections 123, 341, 342, 345(1), 346 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 103 & 104 of The Trade Marks Act, 1999. It is the primary contention of the Applicant that the Applicant has been arraigned as an accused solely on the basis of the statement of the co-accused. 2. Learned A.PP., while denying the aforesaid contention, submits that the Applicant is involved in the alleged Arjun 1 20-ABA-140-2026.doc offence and has received money in his account. It is further submitted that the owner of the company, Canus Packaging, in his statement dated 24th February 2026, has stated that the entire day-to-day administration and affairs of the said company were looked after by the present Applicant. 3. Learned A.PP. seeks time to file affidavit placing on record the relevant documents. 4. Let the affidavit be filed on or before 25th March 2026, with an advance copy thereof to be served to the learned Advocate for the Applicant. 5. Stand over to 26th March 2026. 6. Till the next date, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (B). 3. Prayer clause (B) of this Application reads as follows :- B. That pending the hearing and final disposal of this application the applicant be released on interim bail in the event of his arrest, in connection with the State Excise Department Kagal CR. NO. 8/2026 offence punishable under sec. 65(a), (b), (d), (e), 81, 83, 90,108 of Maharashtra Prohibition Act 1949, section 123, 341, 342,345(1), 346 of B.N.S. and section 103 and 104 of Trademark Act 1999 on such terms & conditions as this Hon'ble court deem fit and proper; 4. Mr. Sudarshan Patil, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that the Applicant has appeared before the Investigating Officer of the State Excise Department, Kagal, Kolhapur and has co-operated with the investigation in Crime No. 8 of 2026. On instructions from the Applicant, he states that the Applicant will continue to co-operate with the investigation in Crime No. 8 of 2026 and shall appear before the Arjun 2 20-ABA-140-2026.doc Investigating Officer of the State Excise Department, Kagal, Kolhapur as and when required. 5. Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the Respondent – State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, the State Excise Department, Kagal, Kolhapur, states that the Applicant has appeared before the Investigating Officer in Crime No. 8 of 2026 and the Applicant has cooperated with the investigation of the said crime. She, again on specific instructions from the Investigating Officer, states that, in view of the Applicant's cooperation in the investigation of Crime No. 8 of 2026, custodial interrogation of the Applicant is not required. She, however, submits that a condition of the Applicant appearing before the Investigating Officer as and when required by the Investigating Officer be imposed. 6. Mr. Sudarshan Patil, learned Advocate for the Applicant, on instructions from the Applicant, states that the Applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer in Crime No. 8 of 2026, as and when required by the Investigating Officer and cooperate in the investigation. 7. Statements made by Mr. Sudarshan Patil, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Dr. A. A. Takalkar learned APP for the Respondent – Arjun 3 20-ABA-140-2026.doc State are taken on record. 8. In view of the statement made by Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the Respondent – State, that the custodial interrogation of the Applicant is not required in Crime No. 8 of 2026, Mr. Sudarshan Patil, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that this Application be disposed of. 9. Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 140 of 2026 is disposed of. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Arjun 4 ARJUN KRISHNA RODGE Digitally signed by ARJUN KRISHNA RODGE Date: 2026.08.20 10:34:46 +0530