← Library
Bombay High CourtBA/1309/2025application allowed

Sanket Alias Ganesh Suresh Gangatre v. The State Of Maharashtra

2025-07-17Hon'Ble Shri Justice Arun R. Pedneker3 pages

2025:BHC-AUG:18653

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 927 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1309 OF 2025 Sanket Alias Ganesh Suresh Gangatre

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Thorat Nanabhau R. APP for Respondents: Ms. A. S. Mantri ...

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

Dated : July 17, 2025.

PER COURT :- 1.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State.

2.

The applicant is seeking bail as he was arrested in connection with FIR No.156/2025, dated 29/04/2025, registered with Dharur Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under sections 109, 115(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

The case, as noted in the FIR, states that three individuals-namely Shankar @ Aryan Madhukar Shep, Kalyan Vachishta Shep, and Ujwal @ Dada Mahadeo Munde, assaulted the informant by obstructing his tractor. These persons arrived in a Swift Dzire car and physically assaulted the informant after intercepting his vehicle. The FIR was registered on 30/04/2025, with the incident having occurred on 29/04/2025.

4.

Subsequently, a supplementary statement of the informant was recorded on 24/05/2025, wherein, for the first time, the name of the present applicant was disclosed. Based on this supplementary statement, the applicant was arrested on 14/06/2025, and he has remained in custody since 1 of

927 BA 1309-2025 then.

5.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR clearly names three specific individuals as assailants and does not mention any unknown persons being involved in the assault. He further argues that the applicant's name was introduced only after a delay of 45 days from the date of the incident, raising serious doubts about the credibility of the allegations against him.

6.

On the other hand, the learned APP has produced the injury certificate of the informant, which shows that the injuries sustained are simple in nature. She further submits that there are two prior criminal antecedents against the applicant.

7.

Considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the delay of 45 days in naming the applicant and the absence of any mention of unknown assailants in the original FIR, there appears to be a prima facie possibility that the applicant has been falsely implicated. 8.

Therefore, taking into account the nature of the injuries, the delay in naming the applicant, and the fact that he was not originally named in the FIR, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 9.

In view of the above, the application is allowed in the following terms: - 2 of

927 BA 1309-2025 a] The applicant shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.156/2025, dated 29/04/2025, registered with Dharur Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under sections 109, 115(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- 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. 10.

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.

11.

The application stands disposed of.

( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ) vj gawade/-.

3 of