Akshay Alias Akash Rangnath Lokhande v. The State Of Maharashtra
2025:BHC-AUG:15130
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 951 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 612 OF 2025 Akshay Alias Akash Rangnath Lokhande
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Jadhav Satej S APP for Respondents-State: Ms. A. S. Mantri ...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
Dated : June 17, 2025.
PER COURT :- 1.
Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State.
2.
The applicant seeks bail in connection with FIR No.394 of 2021 registered with Shirdi Police Station, District Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 109, 120-B, 201, 212, 506, 34 of the IPC, Sections 3, 7, 25, and 27 of the Arms Act, and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), and 3(4) of the MCOC Act.
3.
The learned Counsel for the applicant relies upon the order passed by this Court dated 13/03/2025 in Bail Application No.2381/2024, granting bail to co-accused Kiran Madhav Hazare. He submits that the role attributed to the present applicant is identical to that of Kiran Hazare and, therefore, seeks regular bail for the applicant on the ground of parity. 4.
The learned APP does not dispute the factual position but submits that, as per oral instructions, the order dated 13/03/2025 passed by this Court in the case of Kiran Hazare is under consideration for challenge before the 1 of
951 BA 612-2025 Superior Court.
5.
However, there is no dispute that the role attributed to the applicant is identical to that of Kiran Hazare. As per the prosecution, Kiran Hazare had questioned Ravi about what should be done with Suraj Thakur. In response, Ravi Gondkar allegedly instructed that Suraj should be eliminated. After ending the call, Kiran allegedly asked Akshay, who was driving, to take out the material, following which Akshay handed over two pistols to Kiran. It is alleged that Kiran then fired at the chest of Suraj Thakur and, while Suraj was fleeing, chased him and fired again. 6.
As far as the present applicant is concerned, the allegation against him is that he handed over the gun to Kiran, who then shot Suraj. The applicant's role thus cannot be higher than that of Kiran Hazare, and therefore, on the ground of parity, the applicant is granted bail. 7.
In view of the above, the application is allowed in the following terms: - a] The applicant shall be released on bail in connection with FIR The applicant is seeking bail as he was arrested in connection with FIR No.0394 of 2021, registered with Shirdi Police Station, District Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under sections 307, 109, 120-B, 201, 212, 506, 34 of IPC and under Section 3, 7, 25, 27 of 2 of
951 BA 612-2025 Arms Act, and under Section 3 (1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of MCOC Act, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. b] The applicant, upon being released on bail, shall not contact the informant, in any manner whatsoever, during the pendency of the trial.
c] The applicant shall co-operate with the trial Court and he shall attend each and every date, unless exempted by the trial Court. d] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution and he shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.
e] The applicant, upon being released on bail, shall place on record of the trial Court the details of his Contact Number and residential address with updates in case of any change. 8.
Needless to say, in case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions, the bail granted to the applicant shall be liable to be cancelled. It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present bail application. The concerned Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.
9.
The application stands disposed of.
( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ) vj gawade/-.
3 of