Vikas @ Vicky Ram Dolare v. State Of Maharashtra
Harish
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2553 OF 2025 Vikas @ Vicky Ram Dolare .....Applicant Vs.
State of Maharashtra .....Respondent HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Mr. Vijay Killedar, Advocate for the Applicant Ms. Veera Shinde, A.P.P., for the Respondent - State. Mr. Ganesh Ingale, A.P.I., MIDC Police Station, Solapur - Present.
by HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Date:
2025.09.19 18:03:09 +0530 CORAM :
SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE :
17th SEPTEMBER 2025 P.C.:
1.
The applicant is seeking regular bail in connection with C.R. No.342 of 2022 registered with M.I.D.C. Police Station, Solapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 201, 341, 323, 506, 143, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "IPC"), and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, and Sections 37(1) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
2.
It is prosecution's case that on 19th June, 2022 at around 2.30 p.m. the applicant and co-accused has assaulted the first 1/4
informant with sword with intention to kill him. 3.
It is the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the co-accused Vishal Shinde against whom same allegations are leveled, has been released on bail by this Court (Coram: Anil S. Kilor J.). The applicant is entitled for bail on the principle of parity. The applicant is behind bar more than 28 months. Hence, requested to allow the application. 4.
It is the contention of learned APP that the applicant has assaulted the first informant with sword with intention to kill him. The attack was so serious that fingers of the first informant was cut and he was seriously injured. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond and threaten the first informant and prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.
5.
I have heard both the counsel. Perused the FIR and documents produced on record.
6.
The allegation against the co-accused Vishal Shinde, who has been released on bail and the allegations against the applicant are same. The bail order of the co-accused has not been challenged by the prosecution. Considering these facts, the 2/4
applicant is entitled for bail on the principle of parity. Hence, I pass following order :
ORDER
I.
The application is allowed.
II.
The applicant be released on bail in connection with C.R. No. 342 of 2022 registered with M.I.D.C. Police Station, Solapur, on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
III. The applicant shall not enter into the territorial jurisdiction of District-Solapur, till the conclusion of the trial;
IV.
The applicant shall provide their address and name of the nearby police station to the IO, which they shall attend the said police station on 1st day of every month between 10.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m., till the conclusion of the trial except on the date of trial ;
V.
The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also not tamper with the evidence.
VI.
Liberty is granted to the State to apply for cancellation of bail in case of any breach of 3/4
condition or if the applicant commits similar offence;
VII. The applicant shall attend the trial before the trial Court regularly on every date unless exemption is granted by the trial Court.
7.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.
8.
It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. 9.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
[SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.] 4/4