Mahadya @ Mahadev Dundappa Dindure v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 201 OF 2025 Mahadya @ Mahadev Dundappa Dindure ... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Ashraf Ali Shaikh (Through VC) i/b. Mr. Ibrahim Abdul Shaikh, Advocate for the Applicant.

Smt. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for the Respondent-State. _________________________________________________________________ SONALI SATISH KILAJE by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date:

2026.02.16 12:56:58 +0700

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 28th JANUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R.No. 173 of 2024 registered with Chikali Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 392 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC") and Sections 4 and 25 of Arms Act under Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Sections 37(1) (3) r/w. 135 of Maharashtra Police Act and Sections 3(1)(ii) and 3(4) of The Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA Act'). 2.

It is prosecution's case that on 25.03.2024, around 5.15 p.m., when first informant was proceeding on motorcycle, at that time, applicant and co-accused stopped his motorcycle and demanded Rs.500/- from him. When first informant refused to give the money, it is alleged that applicant

and co-accused threatened him with sickle and took out Rs.900/- from shirt pocket of the first informant.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for more than 20 months. There is no progress in trial. The Test Identification Parade of the applicant has not been conducted and requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant has 10 antecedents. He is a habitual offender. He has been seen in CCTV footage. He has committed present crime when he was externed from Solapur District and requested to reject the application. 5.

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused chargesheet and documents produced on record. The applicant is behind bars for more than 20 months. There is no progress in trial. In FIR, name of the applicant is mentioned only as "Mahadya" but no Test Identification Parade of the applicant is conducted. It may take time to conclude the trial and I pass following order.

ORDER

i.

The applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 173 of 2024 registered with Chikali Police Station, District Pune, on executing P.R.Bond of Rs. 30,000/- on furnishing one or two sureties in the like amount.

ii.

The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

iii. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

6.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of. All pending applications, if any, disposed of. 7.

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.

8.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)