1 25.aba.803.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.803 OF 2026 Chetan Shalikram Mandavgade ..vs.. State of Maharashtra - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri V.D. Darne, Advocate for the applicant. Shri A.M. Kadukar, APP for non-applicant/State. CORAM: M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : 15.09.2026. Heard. 2. Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.1071 of 2026 registered with Awadhutwadi Police Station, District Yavatmal for the offences punishable under Section 306 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, the applicant prayed for pre-arrest protection. 3. As per the FIR, the informant is a Cashier in a Yavatmal District Central Co-operative Bank whereas the applicant is a daily wage worker, working as a peon. On 25.06.2026 at around 10.00 to 10.30 a.m., when the informant took a break, the applicant allegedly stolen three rings of Rs.500/- notes amounting to Rs.1,50,000/- from her table. It is further alleged that applicant had changed the position/angle of CCTV camera located at cashier cabin. Hence, the FIR. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that merely on the basis of suspicion, the applicant has been made an accused in the alleged incident. He is the peon 2026:BHC-NAG:12200 2 25.aba.803.2026 in the said bank working on daily wages since from four years and hold a clean record. He submits that the CCTV cameras are installed in the bank and while cleaning the same before 10 days of the alleged incident i.e. on 15.06.2026, the angle of the said camera was changed in which the cabin of cashier was visible and the alleged cash went missing from the cashier cabin on 25.06.2026. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is made a scapegoad as he is being a peon in the bank. As there is no material against him, the applicant is prayed to be protected. 5. On the other hand learned APP vehemently opposed the application on the ground that with an ill intention the applicant changed the angle of the CCTV camera in which the cashier cabin was visible before 10 days of the incident, after which while cleaning the camera, the said portion of cashier cabin was not visible in the CCTV footage and as soon as he got an opportunity, he stole the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- from the cabin of the cashier. He further submits that for near- about four minutes the applicant cleaned the said camera on 15.06.2026. To substantiate his contention, he invited my attention to the statement of the witness and the CCTV footage, which specifically shows suspicious movement of the applicant around the cabin of the cashier and and was also seen in the CCTV of parking, putting something in his motorcycle and changing the place of the said motorcycle. Therefore learned APP submits that right from the changing the angle of the CCTV camera on 15.06.2026, he was planing to commit 3 25.aba.803.2026 the offence. The said bank conducted an independent inquiry, in which they found that the applicant is the only person who had stolen the amount and therefore, considering the above facts, the application is prayed to be rejected. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. From the FIR as well as the case diary it appears that on 15.06.2026, the applicant cleaned the CCTV camera of the said bank and changed the angle of the said camera. The alleged incident of theft occurred on 25.06.2026 at about 10:29 a.m. and that the applicant’s activity was found to be somewhat suspicious and therefore, entire blame has shifted on the applicant. However after going through the case diary, it appears that merely on the basis of suspicion, he has been made an accused. There is no concrete proof, that it was only the applicant, who had stolen 3 bundles of Rs.500/- amounting to Rs.1,50,000/- from the cabin of the cashier. 7. Under such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the applicant had made out a case for grant of bail. Hence, the following order : (a) The Application is allowed and disposed of. (b) In the event of arrest the applicant Chetan Shalikram Mandavgade in Crime No.1071 of 2026 registered with Awadhutwadi Police Station, District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Sections 306 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, be released on bail 4 25.aba.803.2026 on executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount. (c) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on every Sunday between 11.00 a.m. to 02.00 p.m. or as and when called by the Investigating Officer to facilitate the investigation. (d) The Applicant/Accused shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency. (e) The Applicant/accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence. (f) The Applicant/accused shall provide his residential address and cell number to the concerned Investigating Officer. 8. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly. (M.M. NERLIKAR , J. ) Trupti Signed by: Trupti D. Agrawal Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 15/09/2026 17:24:44