Shivgan IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 51 OF 2026 Rohit Chandrakant Gopan ...Applicant Versus State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Rankhambe Vishal Vinayak, for the Applicant.

Ms. Anuja Sunil Gotad, APP for the State-Respondent.

Mr. Sanjay Kumbar, PSI attached to Chembur Police Station, present.

CORAM DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.

DATED: 14^th JANUARY 2026 PC:-

1. By this Application, the Applicant seeks his enlargement on bail in connection with FIR No. 178 of 2025 dated 15^th April 2025 registered with the Chembur Police Station, Brihanmumbai City for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 189(2), 189(4), 191(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’) and Sections 37(1)(a), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief, is that, on 15^th April 2025, there was quarrel between the deceased and few of his friends including one person called Vaibhav. There was some verbal quarrel between the said friends leading the deceased to hit a friend called, Vaibhav on his head by a beer bottle. Vaibhav was injured and in his anger, took out a knife from his waist band and stabbed the deceased. On account of being stabbed by the knife, the deceased namely, Farid fell down. Vaibhav’s friends present on the spot including the Applicant, carried the deceased to the hospital where he was declared dead. The Applicant and Co-accused were arrested on 18^th April 2025 pursuant to the FIR being registered.

3. The Applicant made an application seeking bail before the Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai. However, by order dated 28^th November 2025, his bail application was rejected. Hence, the Applicant is before this Court for the reliefs as prayed.

4. Mr. Vishal Vinayak Rankhambe, learned counsel appearing for the Applicant, submits that this is a case of false implication. The CCTV Footage and the statements of the witnesses clearly indicate that it was Vaibhav, who took out a knife from his waistband and recklessly stabbed the deceased two times on his chest and stomach leading to the injuries to which Farid succumbed. He submits that there is no material on record indicating complicity of the Applicant in the present offence and in fact, it is the Applicant along with other friends, who has taken the deceased Farid to the hospital. The Applicant is arrested on 18^th April 2025 and has suffered incarceration for no fault. He thus, prays that the Applicant be released on bail.

5. Ms. Anuja Gotad, learned APP representing the State in the matter, submits that the offence is serious however, she does concede that there are no antecedents against the Applicant.

6. Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and having gone through the record with their assistance, it appears from the statements and the CCTV Footage Panchanama that it is Vaibhav, who is seen and stated to have stabbed the deceased Farid twice on his stomach and chest, which led to his death. The Applicant is seen to have carried the deceased along with other friends to the hospital where he was declared dead. Prima facie, it apppears that the Applicant may not have been involved in the commission of the said offence. Admittedly, there are no antecedents against the Applicant.

7. In view of the aforesaid, I am inclined to enlarge the Applicant on bail. It is accordingly ordered as under:-

ORDER i) The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ with one or two local sureties in the like amount;

ii) The Applicant shall attend the Trial Court concerned on each and every date unless exempted by the orders of the Trial Court concerned;

iii) The Applicant shall also attend the Police Station concerned once in a month on first Monday between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. till the charges are framed;

iv) If the Applicant has not deposited his passport, if any, the Applicant shall deposit the same wi