Prathmesh Arun Ingle v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3794 OF 2025 Prathmesh Arun Ingle ...Applicant versus The State Of Maharashtra

...Respondent

_________________________________________________________________ Ms. Shubhangi Parulekar along with Mr. Sudarshan Dongre, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. M. G. Patil, APP for Respondent-State.

_________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 11th FEBRUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 381 of 2024 registered with Sangvi Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 352, 351(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 4(27) of the Arms Act, Sections 37(1) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, Sections 3 and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections 3(1)(ii) and 3(2) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999. 2.

It is prosecution's case that on 15th September 2024 at 4:00 a.m,, the applicant and the co-accused assaulted the son of the first informant with sickle with the intention to kill him and damaged the car Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:

2026.02.13 11:06:31 +0530 SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM of the first informant.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for more than one year and three months. There is no progress in the trial. The main allegations are against the co-accused. There are no specific allegations against the applicant regarding assault on the first informant's son. Hence, requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant and the co-accused assaulted the son of the first informant with sickle with the intention to kill him on the ground of an old dispute. The applicant has antecedents and he has been identified by the first informant. If the applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the first informant and prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application. 5.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. In the FIR, the main allegations are against the co-accused, stating that he tried to assault the first informant's son with a sickle. There are no specific allegations against the applicant regarding the assault. To prove it, evidence is required. The applicant is behind bars for more than one year and three months. There is no progress in the trial. Considering these facts, I pass following order :

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 381 of 2024 registered with Sangvi Police Station, 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.)