Dinesh Raysing Bhil v. The State Of Maharashtra

2025:BHC-AUG:16160

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 967 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 735 OF 2025 DINESH RAYSING BHIL

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Kulkarni Suniket Anil APP for Respondent/State : Mrs. V.N. Patil-Jadhav ...

CORAM :

ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

DATE :

25/06/2025 P.C. :

1.

Heard the 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 Crime No. 351/2024 dated 29.11.2024 registered with Taloda Police Station, District Nandurbar for the offences punishable under section 103(1), 115(2) of B.N.S., 2023.

3.

The learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the order dated 24.2.2025 passed by this Court in BA No. 120/2025 by which bail was granted to the co-accused in this crime. The learned counsel has taken me through relevant portion of para No. 5 of the above order, which is reproduced below :- "5.

.....

However, from the FIR itself, it is evident that present applicant was not reported to be in the company of main accused Bunty or deceased. Thus, his role is not surfacing atleast from the FIR. Consequently, when nothing is shown to be recovered or discovered at the instance of applicant, no purpose would be served by further detaining him."

4.

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that name of the present applicant is also not mentioned in the FIR, so also there is no recovery at the instance of the applicant and the names of the applicant and the co-accused, who was granted bail by above order, were taken by the informant in supplimentary statement. The learned counsel therefore submits that considering the above order of this court, on the ground of parity, applicant may also be released on bail. 5.

The learned APP has not been able to point dispute this factual aspect that the name of the applicant is taken by the informant in supplimentary statement and there is no recovery at the instance of the present applicant. 6.

Considering the above aspect and more particularly there was no recovery at the instance of the applicant and name of the applicant is subsequently taken, on the ground of parity, bail can be granted to the present applicant on the same terms and conditions as granted by this Court to the co-accused in BA No. 120/2025 vide order dated 120/2025. 7.

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

a] The applicant shall be released on bailin connection with Crime No. 351/2024 dated 29.11.2024 registered with Taloda Police Station, District Nandurbar for the offences punishable under section 103(1), 115(2) of B.N.S., 2023, on executing Personal Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount.

b] The applicant shall not tamper prosecution evidence. 8.

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. 9.

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.

10.

The application stands disposed of.

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.] SSC/