Pandurang Tulshiram Shinde And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2435 OF 2025

1. Pandurang Tulshiram Shinde

2. Narsingh @ Narsappa Subhash .... Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ----- Mr. Vresh Purwant, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. S. H. Yadav, A.P.P., for the Respondent - State. ----- CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date:

2025.11.21 16:21:12 +0530 SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM DATE : 20th NOVEMBER, 2025.

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the Applicants and learned APP for the Respondent - State.

2.

Learned counsel for the Applicants, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw this application on behalf of Applicant No.1 - Pandurang T. Shinde. Leave granted.

3.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the Applicants, the application is rejected against the Applicant No.1. 4.

The Applicant No.2 is apprehending arrest in Crime No.120 Shantanu S. Dhudum 1/4

of 2025 registered with Akkalkot North Police Station, District Solapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 118(1), 115(2), 140(2), 308(2), 308(5), 60, 351(2), 352(3)(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNS Act"). 5.

It is prosecution's case that on 12th March, 2025, the Applicants and co-accused kidnapped the first informant in car on the ground of non payment of hand loan given by Accused No.1 and assaulted him in moving car.

6.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicants that the allegations against the Applicant No.2 are that he was present in the car and assaulted the first informant with fist and kick blows. The Applicant No.2 has no antecedent. Hence, requested to allow the application.

7.

It is contention of learned APP that the Applicants and coaccused kidnapped the first informant in car for non payment of hand loan of Accused No.1 and assaulted him with fist and kick blows. Considering the allegations against the Applicant, his custodial interrogation is required, and requested to reject the application. 8.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused F.I.R. and documents produced on record.

Shantanu S. Dhudum 2/4

9.

It appears that the offence is occurred out of finance dispute. The main allegations are against the Accused No.1 and he had motive in the present crime. Considering the allegations against the Applicant No.2 that he was present in the car and assaulted the first informant with fist and kick blows, his custodial interrogation is not required, and I pass following order:

ORDER

i. The Application is allowed.

ii. In the event of arrest, the Applicant No.2 - Narsingh @ Narsappa Subhash, be enlarged on bail in connection with C.R. No.120 of 2025 registered with Akkalkot North Police Station, District Solapur, on executing P. R. Bond to the extent of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

iii. The Applicant No.2 shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

iv. The Applicant No.2 shall not contact and/or threaten/influence any witnesses in the present crime.

Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/4

10.

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

11.

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.

12.

All the concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) Shantanu S. Dhudum 4/4