Ashish Budhrani Lachmandas Budhrani Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ashish Budhrani Lachmandas Budhrani Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail protection (earlier granted on 13.01.2025) confirmed subject to conditions: attendance at the police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer; no tampering with prosecution evidence and no influencing of informant/witnesses; cooperation with investigation and trial court proceedings; breach renders the protection liable to cancellation.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants, apprehending arrest in Crime No. 1153 of 2024 (MIDC Waluj Police Station) for offences under Sections 123, 223, 274, 275, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, arising out of seizure of tobacco/tobacco products including Gutkha, are entitled to anticipatory bail, given the doubted applicability of Section 123 BNS to such seizures and the bailable nature of the remaining offences.

Court's answer

Applying the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Eknath Bhalchandra Patil), that Section 123 of the B.N.S. would not apply to seizure of tobacco products, this court granted interim protection to the applicants.

Ratio / Principle

The earlier protection granted by order dated 13.01.2025 stands confirmed on conditions: (i) the applicants shall attend the police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer; (ii) they shall not tamper with prosecution evidence nor influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned; (iii) they shall cooperate with the investigation and proceedings before the trial Court; and in the event of violation of any condition, the protection shall be liable to be cancelled.

Key takeaways

The observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail application, and the trial Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by them.obiter¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad (Arun R. Pedneker, J.), common order dated 03.02.2025 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 42 of 2025 (Ashish Budhrani Lachmandas Budhrani), heard along with Anticipatory Bail Application No. 47 of 2025 (Sachin Nagraj Mhaske), versus The State of Maharashtra. The applicants apprehended arrest in Crime No. 1153 of 2024, registered at MIDC Waluj Police Station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for offences punishable under Sections 123, 223, 274, 275, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, concerning seizure of tobacco and tobacco products including Gutkha. Following the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Eknath Bhalchandra Patil v. The State of Maharashtra (SLP (Cri.) No. 8698/2023, decided on 28.07.2023) — that Section 123 BNS [corresponding to Section 328 IPC] would not apply to seizure of tobacco products — and noting that all other offences were bailable, the Court confirmed the interim protection granted by order dated 13.01.2025, subject to conditions: attendance at the police station when called by the Investigating Officer, no tampering with evidence or influencing of informant/witnesses, and cooperation with the investigation and trial; violation would render the protection liable to cancellation. The applications stood disposed of, with observations expressly confined to the disposal of the anticipatory bail applications and without influencing the trial Court.

2025:BHC-AUG:2975

44

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

44 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 42 OF 2025 ASHISH BUDHRANI LACHMANDAS BUDHRANI

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Mohammed Aamir h/f. Mr. Shaikh Altamash Abdul Latif APP for Respondent/State: Mr. R. S. Wani

WITH

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 47 OF 2025 SACHIN NAGRAJ MHASKE VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Shaikh Kayyum Najir APP for Respondent/State: Mr. R. S. Wani

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

DATE : 03.02.2025

P.C. :

1] Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned APP for the respondent-State.

2] The applicants are apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.1153 of 2024, registered at MIDC Waluj Police Station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 123, 223, 274,

2

44

275, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 & Section 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

3] This Court, by order dated 14.11.2024 passed in ABA No.1670 of 2024, at para no. 3 has observed as under :

“3] Considering the judgment of this Court in the case of Gaurav Jayantbhai Hapani Vs. The State of Maharashtra in Anticipatory Bail Application No.3406 of 2022, decided on 19.01.2023 and also the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Eknath Bhalchandra Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra in Petition (s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No. 8698/2023, decided on 28.07.2023, wherein in identical fact situation, the Hon’ble Supreme Court so also this Court in the above noted judgments has observed that applicability of Section 328 of Indian Penal Code [123 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita] is doubted in the case of seizure of tobacco and tobacco products including Gutkha and anticipatory bail has been granted. In the instant case also, except Section 123 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, all other offences are bailable and the same is not disputed by the learned APP and the matter pertains to seizure of tobacco and tobacco products including Gutkha.”

4] Considering the law as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that Section 123 of the B.N.S. would not apply to seizure tobacco products, this court granted interim protection to the applicants.

5] In view of the same, the earlier protection granted by order dated 13.01.2025 stands confirmed on following conditions:

i] The applicants shall attend the police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

3

44

ii] The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. They shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.

iii] The applicants shall co-operate with the investigation and also in the proceedings before the trial Court.

6] In the event, the applicants violate any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled.

7] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail application and the trial Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.

8] The applications stand disposed of.

marathe

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE