Shyam Purushootam Kusare v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Panchpaoli, Nagpur

13_BA_1135_2025.docx 8Prasad Rajput IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.

OF 2025 Sahil Raju Shaikh .. Applicant

Versus

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

 Ms. Sonali Ramchandra Chavan, Advocate for Applicant.  Mr. Balraj B. Kulkarni, APP for State.

...................

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : MARCH 21, 2025 P. C.

:

1.

Heard Ms. Chavan, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Kulkarni, learned APP for State.

2.

Ms. Chavan, learned Advocate for Applicant would submit that role of the Applicant is similar to role of co-accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail by this Court. She has drawn my attention to the order dated 24th February, 2025 which is appended at page No.506 of the Application. On perusing the same it is seen that out of total 10 accused 7 accused have been enlarged on bail. The reference to the bail order of the 7 co-accused in the present crime is made in the same order when that case was heard by the Court. 2.1.

She would submit that Applicant is not the principal Accused who has committed the robbery in question. She would

13_BA_1135_2025.docx submit that role of Applicant is spelled out only on the basis of witness statements in the prosecution case.

3.

Considering the indictment of the Applicant and role attributable to him, learned prosecutor is directed by the Court to take appropriate instructions from the concerned Investigating Officer and spell out the precise role of the Applicant to the Court on the next adjourned date.

4.

Considering that Applicant is a young offender and he was pursuing B.Com studies when the incident happened, learned Advocate for Applicant would persuade the Court to keep the matter at an early date. She would submit that she would submit the bonafides of the Applicant of his academic pursuits before the Court on the next adjourned date in the form of additional-affidavit which shall be filed by one of his family members. Leave to file such Affidavit in granted.

5.

Since Application is made on the ground of parity with specific contention with respect to the role of Applicant being identical to the role of other co-accused persons, present Application shall be heard and decided on the next adjourned date. 6.

Stand over to 28th March, 2025 (F.O.B.).

P.R. Rajput [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]