Dismissed¶20

Rajiv Ranjan v. Meena Rana

Bombay HC19 Nov 2025APPLN/440/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Criminal Application No. 440 of 2025, decided 19.11.2025 by N.R. Borkar, J.: rejection of first informant Rajiv Ranjan's application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted by Sessions Court (order dated 6th November 2025 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1432 of 2025) to respondent No.2 Meena Rana, accused No.4 in Crime No. 617 of 2025 of Goregaon Police Station, Mumbai, under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 356(3) and 61(2) Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023; extortion allegations found to be against co-accused Parul Rana; Sessions Court's reasons held valid; no case made out; application rejected.

What did the court decide?

On perusal of the first information report, the allegations of extortion are against co-accused Parul Rana, not against respondent No.2. ¶20

Rajiv Ranjan vs Meena Rana — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

902-appln-440-25.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 440 OF 2025

¶3

Rajiv Ranjan …Applicant

¶4

V/s.

¶5

The State of Maharashtra

¶6

Meena Rana

¶7

...Respondents.

¶8

Mr. Sandeep Singh a/w. Mr. Dhairya Parekh i/b Mr. Satyadev Joshi for the Applicant.

¶9

Mrs. A.A. Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent/State. PI Ummesh M. Dandile, Goregaon Police Station present.

¶10

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 19.11.2025.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

The applicant in the present application is the first informant in Crime No. 617 of 2025 registered at Goregaon Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 308(2), 356(3) and 61 (2) of the Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023.

¶13

By the order dated 6^th November 2025 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1432 of 2025, the learned Sessions Court has allowed the application filed by the respondent No.2 herein, who is accused No.4 in the aforesaid crime, for anticipatory bail. The present application is filed seeking cancellation of said anticipatory bail granted by the Sessions Court to respondent No.2.

Dinesh S. Sherla

1/2

902-appln-440-25.odt

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent No.1/State.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation against respondent No.2 are of extortion. It is submitted that the Sessions Court, without considering the seriousness of the offence, granted anticipatory bail to respondent No.2. It is submitted that during the pendency of the application for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court the respondent No.2 was directed to attend the concerned police station. It is submitted that the said condition was not complied with and the same was brought to the notice of the Sessions Court. It is submitted that inspite of it the Sessions Court has granted anticipatory bail to the respondent No.2. It is submitted that the anticipatory bail granted to the respondent No.2 therefore, needs to be cancelled.

¶19

Learned APP for the respondent No.1/State, on instructions, submits that the respondent No.2 has attended the police station.

¶20

I have perused the first information report. The allegations of extortion are against the co-accused Parul Rana. The learned Sessions Court has assigned valid reasons for granting anticipatory bail to the respondent No.2. Therefore, no case is made out to entertain the present application. Hence, the Application is rejected.

¶21

Dinesh S. Sherla

¶22

2/2

Rajiv Ranjan v. Meena Rana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Ranjan v. Meena Rana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishal Ashok Khopade vs Shweta Vishal Khopade and Anr.

Ganesh Rajendra Jadhav vs State of Maharashtra

Sohel Anwar Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rajiv Ranjan vs Konika Vinod Verma

Raj Lilaram Chandwani vs State of Maharashtra

Vikas Anil Singh vs State of Maharashtra