Sunil Arjun Sonavane v. State Of Maharashtra

Laxmi Sontakke (P.A.) IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1708 OF 2025 Sunil Arjun Sonavane .. Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................

 Mr. Nitin Sejpal a/w Siddharth Gharat, Akshata Desai, Advocates for Applicant.

Digitally signed by LAXMI SUBHASH SONTAKKE Date:

2025.05.06 18:28:19 +0530 LAXMI SUBHASH SONTAKKE  Ms. Mahalakshmi Ganapathy, APP for the State. ...................

CORAM

: MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : MAY 05, 2025 P.C.

:

1.

Heard Mr. Sejpal, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Ganpathy, learned APP for Respondent.

2.

This is an Application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.I-149 of 2025 registered with Tulinj Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 115, 351, 352, 189(2)(4),191(2)

(3) and 190 of the IPC.

3.

The Applicant is arrayed as accused No.6 in the crime. The precursor incident to the alleged incident happened to be a petty quarrel over parking of motorcycles between the parties as specifically argued by Mr. Sejpal and between accused No. 1 and deceased victim. The verbal argument between parties escalated to such an extent that it led to a free physical fight in which victim was assaulted.

4.

Learned Advocate has drawn my attention to the fact that in so far as role attributed to Applicant is concerned, it pertains to he inflicting fist and kick blows and nothing more. He would submit that reason for death of victim is due to infliction of a fatal blow by Accused No.1 on his vital part and not by the present Applicant. He would submit that Applicant has no criminal antecedents neither he was responsible for the precursor incident which led to the incident of assault and resultant demise of victim.

He would inform the Court that the Applicant is gainfully employed and in view of the aforesaid facts, would persuade Court to consider his case since he has already faced the ignominy of incarceration from 3rd March 2025 till date. Learned prosecutor shall take appropriate instructions on the veracity of submissions made by Mr. Sejpal and accordingly apprise the Court on the precise role of Applicant on the next adjourned date to enable and consider the bail application of Applicant.

5.

In view of the paucity of time and the request made by Mr. Sejpal liberty is granted to the Advocate for the Applicant to mention the matter on re-opening.

6.

List the matter on 8th July, 2025 along with Bail Application No. 1702 of 2025 of another accused person in the same crime. 7.

Liberty to the Applicant to move the vacation Court in case of

exigency.

Laxmi Sontakke [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]