Nilesh Laxman Bhosale v. State Of Maharashtra And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3436 OF 2025 Nilesh Laxman Bhosale .... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr.
.... Respondents ----- Mr. S. S. Jadhawar a/w Mr. T. S. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. N. B. Patil, A.P.P., for the Respondent - State. Mr. Nitin N. Nikam, appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2 (Through Legal Aid).
Mr. V. K. Waykar, API, LCB Solapur Rural - present. ----- CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date:
2025.10.16 19:20:08 +0530 SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM DATE : 15th OCTOBER, 2025.
P.C. :
1.
By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular in connection with C.R. No. 306 of 2025 registered with Tembhurni Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(1), 74, 115(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNS Act").
2.
It is prosecution's case that on 11th May, 2025 around 11:30 a.m, when the first informant was working in kitchen, at that time, Shantanu S. Dhudum 1/4
the Applicant and co-accused dragged her in hall and assaulted her with wooden stick. It is alleged that the Applicant and co-accused outraged her modesty and tried to pour poison in her mouth with intention to kill her.
3.
It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the Applicant is advocate, he is behind bar around sixty days. The injuries suffered by the first informant are simple in nature. Due to family dispute, the false allegations are made against the Applicant. Hence, requested to allow the application.
4.
It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the Applicant and co-accused brutally assaulted the first informant and tried to pour poison in her mouth with intention to kill her. The Applicant has antecedents. If the Applicant is released on bail, he may threaten or assault the first informant, and requested to reject the application. 5.
I have heard all learned counsel, perused F.I.R. and documents produced on record.
6.
The Applicant is behind bar around sixty days. Investigation is almost completed. The injuries suffered by the first informant are simple in nature. To prove the charges against the Applicant, the Shantanu S. Dhudum 2/4
evidence is required. It may take time to conclude the trial. The Applicant is Advocate. Considering these facts, I pass following order:
ORDER
i. Application is allowed.
ii. The Applicant be released on bail in connection with C.R. No. 306 of 2025 registered with Tembhurni Police Station, 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 attend the concerned police station as and when required.
iv. The Applicant shall not enter in Tembhurni, till filing of the charge-sheet.
v. The Applicant shall not contact the first informant and threaten her.
vi. If the Applicant threaten the first informant, it will be a ground for cancellation of bail.
vii. The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witness or any person concerned with the case. Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/4
7.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.
8.
Mr. Nitin N. Nikam, is appointed through Legal Aid to represent for Respondent No.2, the Professional Fess of Rs.10,000/- be paid to him.
9.
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.
10.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. ( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) Shantanu S. Dhudum 4/4