Jilbya @ Akash Yadav Gaikwad v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1970 OF 2025 Jilbya Alias Akash Yadav Gaikwad ... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Ms. Shubhangi Parulekar, a/w. Ms. Vrunda Surve, Advocate for the Applicant.

Mr. B. B. Kulkarni, APP for the Respondent-State. PSI - A.C.Rajput, Pimpri Police Station present. SONALI SATISH KILAJE by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date:

2026.01.12 18:10:24 +0700 _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 9th JANUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R.No. 1113 of 2023 registered with Pimpri Police Station, Pune for the offence punishable under Sections 386, 387, 504, 506, 212 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"), Section 4(25) of Arms Act, Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Section 37(1)(3) read with Section 135 of Maharashtra Police Act and under Sections 3(1) (ii), 3(3), 3(4) of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime, 1999 ("MCOC Act").

2.

It is prosecution's case that on 13.11.2023, at around 9.30 p.m.,

when first informant was selling fire crackers in his shop, the applicant went there and threatened the first informant to give the ransom of Rs.500/- and fire crackers. It is alleged that applicant waved a sickle in the air to threaten the first informant and other shop owners. 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bar for more than two years and three months. There is no progress in the trial. The applicant has not injured anyone. There are allegations against him that he threatened others. The co-accused has been released on bail. It may take time to conclude the trial. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant has nine antecedents. He is a habitual offender. If he released on bail, he may threaten prosecution witnesses and first informant. The sickle has been recovered at the instance of applicant. Hence, requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused FIR and documents produced on record. The allegations against the applicant are of threatening and waving a sickle in the air. No amount was extorted from the first informant and other shop owners. The applicant is behind bar for more than two years and three months. There is no progress in the trial. Considering the above facts, I pass following order.

ORDER

i.

The Applicant is released on bail in C.R.No. 1113 of 2023 registered with Pimpri Police Station, 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 evidence or attempt to influence the witnesses. The Applicant shall not contact the complainant, witnesses or any other person concerned with present case.

iv.

The Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations made in this order and shall decide the matter on its own merits and in accordance with law.

6.

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

7.

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