Anil Alias Sonu Yashwant Chavan v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 921 OF 2025 Anil Alias Sonu Yashwant Chavan ...Appellant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra And Another

...Respondents

Mr. Ritesh Thobde for the appellant.

Mr. Abhishek Nandimath a/w Mr. Shardul Diwan for respondent no. 2 Ms. P. S. Rane APP for the State

CORAM

:

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

17th DECEMBER, 2025.

P.C.

1.

The bail appeal of the appellant is rejected by the Trial Court, hence, the appellant has filed the present appeal. IRESH MASHAL 2.

By this appeal, the appellant is seeking bail in C.R.. No. 533 Digitally signed by IRESH MASHAL Date:

2025.12.22 15:48:58 +0530 of 2024 registered with Sangola Police Station, District: Solapur for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ('SCST Act').

3.

It is prosecution's case that on 11th July 2024, the coaccused assaulted brother-in-law of the first informant with sickle and murdered him.

4.

It is contention of learned counsel for appellant that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegations against the appellant was instigating to kill the deceased. appellant is behind bar for more than 1 year and 4 months. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. Hence, requested to allow the appeal.

5.

It is contention of learned APP alongwith learned counsel for respondent no. 2 that the appellant was instigating the assailants to assault the deceased. This attracts the provisions of SCST Act. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 further submitted that appellant's relatives are threatening the first informant. Hence, requested to reject the appeal.

6.

I have heard both learned counsels, perused F.I.R. and documents produced on record. The co-accused has been released on bail. Accused nos. 1 and 2 assaulted the deceased with sickle. In F.I.R. there is no reference of the appellant instigating the assailants to kill the deceased. appellant is behind bar for more than 1 year and 4 months. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. 7.

In view of above, I pass following order:

O R D E R

I.

The Appeal is allowed.

II.

The Appellant be enlarged on bail in C.R.. No. 533 of 2024 registered with Sangola Police Station, District: Solapur on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

III.

The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

IV.

The appellant shall attend the Trial Court dates, regularly. 8.

The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.

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.)