Ajay Jaypal Valmiki v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3470 OF 2025 Ajay Jaypal Valmiki ...Applicant Vs.

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

VAISHALI ANIL _________________________________________________________________ by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date:

2026.04.09 15:42:31 +0530 Mr. Vaibhav Chandanshive, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S.M. Mangaonkar, APP for Respondent-State. PSI Salunkhe, Hinjewadi Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, present _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 7th APRIL, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the State.

2.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 1095 of 2024 registered with Hinjewadi Police Station, Pune for the offence punishable udner Sections 310(2), 316(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

3.

It is prosecution's case that on 25/09/2024, Applicant and coaccused conspired to rob the first informant. Accordingly they barged in Wagno R car of the first informant and assaulted him with fist and kick blows and robbed amount of Rs.25,90,000/-.

4.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that

applicant has falsely implicated in this case. Applicant is the employee of co-accused Sandip Nimumb. The police has shown recovery of amount of Rs.10,00,000/- from the applicant. But, has shown recovery of amount of Rs.74,00,000/- from Sandip Nikumb from his office address. The amount recovered from the applicant is of the same address. The applicant has no antecedents. Applicant is behind bars more than 1 and 1/2 years and requested to allow the application.

5.

It is contention of learned APP that applicant and co-accused robed the first informant on highway. The Applicant is identified in test identification parade by the complainant. There is recovery of robbed amount from the applicant. If applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.

6.

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.

7.

The memorandum panchnama of co-accused Sandip Nikumb shows that at his instance from office of the co-accused Sandipl Nikumb i.e Davrigaon, Dombivali, Dist. Thane, police recovered amount of Rs.60,00,000/-. The panchnama dated 10/10/2024, time is 10.40 a.m. to 11.10 a.m. It is alleged that on the memorandum statement of the applicant, police has recovered Rs.10,00,000/-. The panchnama date is

10/10/2024 and time is shown 17.45 p.m. to 18.45 p.m. The address of recovery of amount is the same, which is mentioned in the panchnama of co-accused Sandip Nikumb. It creates doubt about recovery of amount at the instance of the applicant.

8.

Considering these facts, I pass following order.

ORDER

(i) The Applicant- Ajay Jaypal Valmiki be released on bail in Crime No. 1095 of 2024 registered with Hinjewadi Police Station, Pune, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. (iv) The Applicant shall attend the concerned police station, as and when required.

(v) Bail Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)