Kiran Balaji Gadgil v. The State Of Maharashtra

2026:BHC-AUG:2654 {1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1119 OF 2025 Kiran Balaji Gadgil ....Applicant

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra .....Respondent .....

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Shaikh Abid R, Dhande Dhananjay Dnyanaba APP for Respondents: Mr. V.V. Jahagirdar.

CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.

DATE : 19th JANUARY, 2026.

P.C. :- 1.

The applicant has approached this court seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 246 of 2025, registered with Pundliknagar Police Station, Dist. Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offence punishable under Section 304-2, 115-2, 352, 351-3 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.

2.

This court vide order dated 7.7.2025 has protected the applicant on the condition to attend the Police Station on every Monday at 11.30 a.m. and cooperate with the investigation. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has complied with the said order, attended the police station as directed and cooperated the investigation. The mobiles allegedly snatched away from the complainant are already recovered by the police authorities. The investigation is almost complete in the present crime. However, the charge sheet is not yet filed. The applicant is ready to abide by any further condition that may be imposed by this Court. The only offence

{2} which is shown as criminal antecedent against the applicant is under Section 307 of IPC in which the applicant is already convicted. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is falsely roped in the present crime. He further submits that since there are no allegations that the applicant has violated any condition imposed by this Court vide interim order, the interim order granting ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicant may, therefore, be confirmed. 3.

As against this, the learned APP Mr. Ingole strongly opposes the application on the ground that the applicant is earlier involved in the offence of attempt to commit murder. Though the applicant has attended the police station in compliance with the interim order passed by this Court and also cooperated with the investigating Officer, however, looking to the criminal antecedent against the applicant, there is every likelihood that the applicant may threaten the witnesses and thereby cause prejudice to the prosecution case. The application may, therefore, be rejected.

4.

I have gone through the investigation papers made available by the learned APP. The applicant has attended the police station as directed by this Court by interim order dated 7.7.2025. The mobile phones allegedly snatched away by the applicant are already recovered by the Investigating Officer even before passing of the interim order dated 7.7.2025. The investigation appears to have been almost complete. The custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be necessary for further investigation, if any. The apprehension of the learned APP can be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions upon the applicant. Hence, the following order :-

O R D E R

[I] The application is allowed.

[II] The interim order dated 7.7.2025 is hereby confirmed.

{3} [III] The applicant shall not enter the city of Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar till the framing of charge by the trial court, except with the prior permission of the Commissioner of Police, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. He shall also not leave the country without such permission.

[iv] The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and threaten the witnesses.

[v] The applicant shall submit his Aadhar and Pan card to the Investigating Officer alongwith mobile numbers and addresses of two of his near relatives and his current address. [IV] The application stands disposed of.

[MEHROZ K. PATHAN] JUDGE.

grt/-