Sagar Ramchandra Khatal v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3538 of 2025 Sagar Ramchandra Khatal ... Applicant/s

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent/s ____________________________________________________________ Mr. Onkar Gurav i/b. Ms. Anjali Patil, Advocate for the Applicant/s. Mr. M. G. Patil, APP for Respondent-State.

API-J. V. Dalavi, Nigadi Police Station, present. _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 12th JANUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 304 of 2018 registered with Nigadi Police Station, PimpriChichwad, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 395, 397, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code 1860, Section 4(25) of the Arms Act and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. 2.

It is prosecution's case that the first informant is a custodian of Checkmate Services. A company of the first informant collects cash from various finance companies and deposited it in ICICI Bank. It is stated that Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:

2026.01.13 18:19:42 +0530 on 3rd May 2018, when the first informant had collected cash from SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM companies and they were proceeding in a Mahindra Bolero Jeep, at that time, one person came near the first informant and put a knife on his neck

and demanded the cash bag. When the first informant refused to give the bag, the said person assaulted the first informant with that knife, and during the scuffle, the said person snatched the bag and ran away on a motorcycle.

3.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bar for more than 7 years and six months, yet the trial is not concluded. The co-accused, against whom similar allegations are made, is released on bail, hence, the applicant is entitled to bail on the principle of parity and requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was present at the time of the incident on a moped. When the co-accused snatched the cash bag from the first informant and ran away, at that time the applicant had helped him. It shows applicant's involvement in the crime. If the applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the prosecution witnesses, and therefore, requested to reject the application. 5.

I have heard both learned counsel and perused the charge-sheet and documents produced on record. There are no allegations against the applicant that he assaulted the first informant and snatched the bag. The allegations against him are of abetment and that the robbed amount of rupees 2,50,000/- is recovered at the instance of the applicant and he has been identified in the test identification parade. The co-accused, against

whom similar allegation are made, is released on bail. The applicant is behind bar for more than seven years and six months, yet the charge is not framed. Considering these facts, I pass the following order :

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 304 of 2018 registered with Nigadi Police Station, Pimpri-Chichwad, 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.)