1 09 ABA 613.26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION [ABA] NO.613 OF 2026 [Shailesh @ Shekhar Pramod Ghode .vs. The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Ralegaon Excise, Tah. Ralegaon, District-Yavatmal] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. V.D. Darne, Advocate with Mr. R.S. Gade, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. M.R. Kavimandan, APP for Respondent-State. ………….. CORAM : PRAVIN S. PATIL, J. DATE : 06-08-2026. 1. Heard. 2. This court by order dated 14.7.2026 granted interim protection to the present applicant by recording the finding in Para 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 as under : 4. By this application, the applicant is apprehending the arrest in the Crime No.56/2026 registered with Ralegaon Excise Police Station, District- Yavatmal for the offences punishable under Sections 65(A,B,D,E), 80, 81, 83, 90 and 108 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949. 5. The complainant, who is a Sub-Inspector in the Excise Department, Ralegaon, alleged that on 10th February 2026, acting upon secret information that an Ashok Leyland container bearing Registration No. MH- 04-HD-0298 was being loaded with illegal liquor boxes near Kalamner Phata, Jiddewar Farm, on the Ralegaon–Allipur Road, a raid was conducted. It is alleged that upon inspection of the said container, several boxes of eggs were found and, behind them, 613 boxes of country liquor, fake liquor manufactured in Goa and Madhya Pradesh, as well as fake foreign liquor, were recovered. It is further alleged that the patrolling team chased a Kia Seltos car bearing 2026:BHC-NAG:10099 2 09 ABA 613.26.odt Registration No. MH-29-BV-7227 near Kapasi Village; however, the driver of the said vehicle fled from the spot. Since the said car is owned by the present applicant, he came to be arrayed as an accused in the present crime during the course of investigation. 6. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that, after registration of the offence, a notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, was issued to the applicant directing him to remain present before the Investigating Officer. Apprehending his arrest, the applicant approached the learned Sessions Court by filing an application for anticipatory bail. The said application came to be rejected and, therefore, the applicant has approached this Court. 7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was never present at the spot when the patrolling team intercepted and inspected the vehicle. It is further submitted that although the Kia Seltos car bearing Registration No. MH-29-BV-7227, though owned by the applicant, was given to the Prashant Chandankhede for another purpose. According to the applicant, it was Prashant Chandankhede who used the said vehicle for transporting the liquor. Hence, considering this aspect of the matter, he is entitled for the interim protection. 9. From the recitals of the FIR, it is clear that the main accused is Prashant Chandankhede. The allegation against the present applicant is that he is the owner of the Kia Seltos car which was allegedly used for transporting the illicit liquor. So also, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Investigating Officer intended only to secure the applicant's cooperation in the investigation and, therefore, the notice was issued to him. Hence, it is only because of the apprehension of arrest on account of his criminal antecedents that the applicant has approached this court seeking anticipatory bail. 3. In response to the notices issued by this court, the learned APP has filed her reply in the matter. According to the 3 09 ABA 613.26.odt learned APP, they have collected ample material during the course of investigation which establishes the commission of serious offence, as alleged. In respect of the role of the present applicant, there is no material is placed on record before this court, except the statement of his mother that he is working as a driver of main accused. The applicant in that respect stated that the car which is involved in the alleged accident is Kia-Seltos which is owned and purchased by him. Therefore, it cannot be said that he is a driver of the vehicle. So also there is no prima facie material available with the investigation officer to state that he is involved in the alleged offence. 4. In respect of criminal antecedent, it is the submission of the applicant that as he is not involved in the present offence, the criminal antecedent cannot be a criteria to reject the present application in the matter. 5. In the circumstances, considering the fact that the present applicant in view of the interim direction of this court has attended the Excise Officer and his statement is also recorded by the concerned officer, in my opinion, his custodial interrogation is not necessary in the matter. 6. Accordingly, interim protection granted by this court dated 14.7.2026 is hereby confirmed only with a rider that instead of attending the Police Station on a specific date, the applicant shall attend the Excise Officer as and when called by the investigation officer with one day prior notice to him. 7. The application stands disposed of. (PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.) Gulande