Amarsing Maruti Shinde v. The State Of Maharashtra
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.3681 OF 2025 Ajay More ... Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr.
... Respondents by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date:
2026.01.29 15:20:31 +0530 NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE ________________________________________________________ Mr.Satyam H. Nimbalkar i/b Mr.Abhishek U. Arote, for the Applicant. Ms.R.D. Humane, APP for Respondent-State.
Ms.Sejal Patel i/b Mr.Yash Vyas, for the Respondent No.2-First Informant/Intervenor.
________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 27th JANUARY, 2026 P.C. :
.
Heard learned counsel for the Applicant, learned APP for the Respondent-State and learned counsel for the Intervenor. 2.
The learned counsel for the Intervenor seeks leave to file Vakalatnama. Leave granted. She tendered Vakalatnama, it is taken on record.
3.
By this Application, Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.102 of 2025 registered with Sinhgad Police Station, Pune,
for the offences punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 314, 316, 340(2) and 344 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ('BNS' for short) 2.
It is prosecution's case that the Applicant was working as Senior Accountant in the company of First Informant. He along with co-accused prepared false receipts and misappropriated amount of Rs.50,30,970/-.
3.
It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the Applicant has no antecedents. The Applicant has given amount of Rs.5,99,500/- to the first informant, which had come in account of the Applicant. The Applicant is behind bars for more than eleven months. There is no progress in trial. Hence, requested to allow the Application. 4.
It is contention of learned APP that, the Applicant has misappropriated the amount. He has prepared false documents. If Applicant released on bail, he may abscond or threaten First Informant and prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the Application. 5.
It is contention of the learned counsel for the First Informant that First Informant has no objection to allow the Application. The First Informant is present in Court. Today the learned counsel for the Applicant has handed over the Demand Draft of Rs.5,99,500/- to her.
6.
I have heard all learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.
7.
The Applicant is behind bar more than eleven months. There is no progress in trial. He has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial.
8.
Considering these facts, I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) The Applicant-Ajay More be released on bail in Crime No.102 of 2025 registered with Sinhgad 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 Court as and when required.
(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)