42 ABA-84-2026.DOC skt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 84 OF 2026 Khajasaheb Amirhamaja Bhaldar …Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra (At the instance of Dehu Road Police Station, Pune) …Respondent Mr. Adhik Kadam i/b Mr. Imran Shaikh, for the Applicant. Ms. M.R. Tidke, APP for the Respondent-State. PSI A. Rathod, Dehu Road Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad. CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 17th AUGUST, 2026 P. C.: 1. Heard Mr. Adhik Kadam, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and Ms. Tidke,learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State. 2. By this Application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Applicant is seeking pre- arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 169 of 2025 registered with Dehu Road Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, for the offences punishable under Sections 308(2), 308(5) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Page 1 of 4 17th August, 2026 42 ABA-84-2026.DOC skt 3. The first informant is Minku Malhotra. As per the prosecution case, Accused i.e., Raju Marimuthu, Ramdas Tate, Babu Tekkel and Chandrashekhar Pathare hatched conspiracy and extorted money of Rs.50,000/- from the first informant. The two accused visited the spot of his construction and made video recordings. Thereafter, the Accused No. 1 Raju Marimuthu visited him and took extortion money of Rs.50,000/- in cash and video recordings of the same are available with the first informant. 4. It is the submission of Mr. Kadam, learned counsel appearing for the Applicant that in the F.I.R., name of the Applicant is not mentioned. All accused whose names are mentioned in the F.I.R. have been released on bail. He submits that there is no role whatsoever attributed to the present Applicant. 5. On the other hand, Ms. Tidke, learned APP states that the offence is very serious and therefore the application be rejected. She states that the Applicant’s role has come to light during the investigation and when the incident took place, he was found to be on the spot. Page 2 of 4 17th August, 2026 42 ABA-84-2026.DOC skt 6. Perusal of the F.I.R. shows that the present Applicant is not made an accused therein. No specific role has been attributed to the Applicant, and there are no criminal antecedents him. The record further shows that the other accused, against whom specific allegations have been made in the F.I.R., have already been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Single Judge by order dated 30th July, 2025, passed in the case of Raju Ramswamy Marimuttu Vs. State of Maharashtra, in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2488 of 2025 along with connected matters. Accordingly, the case is made out for grant of Anticipatory Bail. In view thereof, the following order is passed: O R D E R (a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant-Khajasaheb Amirhamaja Bhaldar, in connection with C.R. No. 169 of 2025 registered with Dehu Road Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two solvent sureties each in the like amount. (b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police 17th August, 2026 42 ABA-84-2026.DOC skt Station as and when called by the Investigating Officer. (c) The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto. (d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel. (e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner. 7. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.] 17th August, 2026