Gurvinder Kundan Singh @ Sunny Paaji v. State Of Maharashtra
vai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.4090 OF 2025 by VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Date:
2026.04.10 20:54:07 +0530 Gurvinder Kundan Singh @ Sunny Paaji ...Applicant V/s.
State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4420 of 2025 IN INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4090 of 2025 Panju Pahilraj Bajaj ...Intervenor
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :
Gurvinder Kundan Singh @ Sunny Paaji ...Applicant V/s.
State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
Mr.Abad Ponda, Senior Counsel with Mr.Bharat V. Bhatia, Ms.Pradnya Sonawane and Adv.Kirti S. Kataria for the Applicant. Mr.H.J. Dedhia, APP for the State - Respondent. Mr.Ganesh Bhujbal i/b Mr.B.D. Shinde for the Intervenor. Mr.Tushar Salunke, API, attached to Central Police Station is present in Court.
1/5
CORAM : R.M. JOSHI , J.
DATE : 10TH APRIL, 2026.
P.C. :- 1.
The Applicant seeks bail in connection with Crime No.81 of 2025 registered with Central Police Station, Thane for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 352, 351(2), 61(2) of Bhartiya Naya Sanhita (BNS) and under Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
2.
The first informant lodged the report to the concerned Police Station intimating to the police about the occurrence of the incident on 27th January,2025 at 3:00 a.m. It is his contention that when he came near his office, two persons wearing masks on their face came on the motorcycle. One of them assaulted him with chopper like weapon and other person caused assault with steel rod. It is claimed by him that he allegedly before causing the said assault that the informant is an informer of the police and that they will not leave him alive. In the said incident he sustained injuries. He was taken to Crity Care Hospital, Ulhasnagar. On the basis of this information, report came to be lodged. Now investigation is over with filing of 2/5
the chargesheet.
3.
Learned senior counsel for the Applicant submits that there is no evidence against the Applicant in order to show his involvement in the crime. It is his submission by referring to the statement of a witness which according to him only indicates that the Applicant and the co-accused i.e. Anand and Aakash, the employees of the Applicant were searching for one Rocky for recovery of money. It is his submission that even if the statement is accepted, this cannot be said that the Applicant could be a party to the assault caused on the informant. It is his further submission that there is no evidence to indicate that any news was published by the informant in the newspaper affecting the present Applicant. It is argued that the co-accused who is said to have committed the reiki, are enlarged on bail.
According to him, phone calls exchanged between the persons and the Applicant cannot be considered as incriminating circumstance in view of the fact that they are the employees of the Applicant.
chargesheet, his further custody is not justified. 4.
Learned counsel for the informant on instructions from the informant, who is present in Court records no objection for the grant of bail.
5.
Learned APP opposed the application by submitting that there is a statement of an independent witness indicating the presence of the co-accused who were doing reiki, as well as the presence of the Applicant nearby the spot of incident. 6.
Here in this case after conclusion of investigation, chargesheet is filed. Prima-facie perusal of the record supports the contention of the learned counsel for the Applicant with regard to there being no material evidence in order to connect the Applicant with crime in question. His submission deserves acceptance on the count that there is no publication of any news by the informant affecting the present Applicant. The statement of the witness does not indicate any intention of the Applicant and the co-accused who are his employees to have any grudge against the informant. Even if the said statement is accepted, at the most it could be said that the Applicant and the co-accused 4/5
were intending to recover money from another person. At this stage, since there is no prima-facie evidence to connect the Applicant with crime in question merely because he has antecedents, bail cannot be rejected. Hence the order : O R D E R :
a).
The Application stands allowed.
b).
The Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with Crime No.81 of 2025 registered with Central Police Station, Thane on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. c).
The Applicant to attend the Trial Court on each dates of hearing unless exempted by the Trial Court. d).
The Applicant not to contact any witness directly or indirectly and not to interfere into the evidence of the prosecution in any manner whatsoever.
e).
It is clarified that above observations are prima-facie in nature and would not bind Trial Court / parties during trial. (R.M. JOSHI, J.) 5/5