IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 338 OF 2026 ALIM RAHIM SHAH VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA … Mr. Sharad S. Solanke, Advocate for Applicant Mr. A. V. Lawate, APP for the Respondent/State CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED : 10th JULY, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. The applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime No.0059/2025, registered with Rahata Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections, 123, 223, 274, 275 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 26(2), 26(2)(a), 27(3)(d), 27(3) (e) and 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act. 2. The First Information Report indicates that a raid was conducted in which a considerably huge quantity of contraband gutkha was seized from the co-accused. On the basis of the statement of the co-accused, the prosecution seeks to implicate the present applicant in the crime. The applicant is alleged to be a supplier of the contraband gutkha. ABA 338.2026.odt 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AUG:27443 3. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that, except for the alleged statement of the co-accused, there is no evidence to connect the applicant with the crime. It is further argued that the statement of the co-accused has no evidentiary value and, in the absence of any other connecting evidence, the involvement of the applicant in the crime cannot be presumed. It is further argued that though antecedents are alleged against the applicant, in the absence of any evidence showing his involvement in the crime, his liberty deserves to be protected. 4. Learned APP opposed the grant of relief to the applicant by citing the seriousness of the crime as well as the quantity of contraband seized at the instance of the co-accused. It is his submission that the statement of the co- accused may not be relevant at the trial; however, it can be considered by the Investigating Agency during the course of investigation. He submits that the applicant has criminal antecedents and, therefore, the application deserves to be rejected. 5. Prima facie, a perusal of the record indicates that the contraband gutkha was seized from the co-accused. No doubt, the statement of the co- accused would be relevant for the purpose of further investigation. However, during the course of investigation, no further evidence has been collected against the present applicant showing any connection between the applicant ABA 338.2026.odt 2 of 3 and the co-accused. In the absence of any such evidence, it cannot be held, at this stage, that the applicant is connected with the crime in question. Once it is so held, the antecedents of the applicant become irrelevant. Hence, the order: ORDER (i) Application is allowed. (ii) In the event of arrest of applicant in connection with Crime No.0059/2025, registered with Rahata Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections, 123, 223, 274, 275 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 26(2), 26(2)(a), 27(3)(d), 27(3) (e) and 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, he shall be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount. (iii) He shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer. (iv) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly. (v) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever. (vi) He further directed to cooperate the investigating agency for further investigation. 6. Learned APP for the Respondent/State to communicate this order to the concerned Police Station. ( R. M. JOSHI, J.) ssp ABA 338.2026.odt 3 of 3