Sunil Ranoji Jawale v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1644 OF 2025 Sunil Ranoji Jawale ....Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. R. B. Thombare along with Rajabhau Chaudhari and Mr. Vedant Mhaiskar, Advocate for the Applicant.

Mr. S. S. Pednekar, APP for Respondent-State. PSI-Suhas Khade, Bhosari Police Station.

_________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 20th JANUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 68 of 2024 registered with Bhosari Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 307,323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (for short "the IPC"), Section 4(25) of the Arms Act, Section 37(1) read with 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, Sections 3 and 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections 3(1)(ii) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999.

SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM 2.

It is prosecution's case that on 1st February 2024, around 7:30 SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.01.22 19:18:38 +0530 pm, the applicant and co-accused assaulted the father of the first informant and the first informant with sickle with the intention to kill them.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for around two years. There are no allegations against the applicant of assaulting the first informant and his father. There is no progress in the trial, it may take time to conclude the trial. There is one antecedent against the applicant. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant instigated the co-accused to assault the father of the first informant. The applicant threatened the people gathered there not to intervene in the quarrel. It shows his active involvement in the crime. The applicant has one antecedent under Section 302 of the IPC. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond and threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused the charge-sheet and documents produced on record. The allegations of assault are against the co-accused. The allegations against the applicant are of instigation. The applicant is behind bars for around two years. There is no progress in the trial, it may take time to conclude the trial. Considering these facts, I pass the following order.

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 68 of 2024

registered with Bhosari Police Station, District Pune, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with 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.

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

6.

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.

7.

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