Rushabh Dattatray Renuse v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO . 3802 OF 2025 Rushabh Dattatray Renuse ...Applicant Vs.

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

_________________________________________________________________ Mr. Kuldeep Nikam a/w. Mr. Om Latpate, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. M.G. Patil, APP for Respondent-State.

API Mahale, Parvati/ Dattawadi Police Station, Pune City present. _________________________________________________________________ VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date:

2026.03.17 16:57:06 +0530

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 16th MARCH, 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.130/2021 registered with Dattawadi Police Station, Dist. Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 143, 144, 147,148, 149, 504, 506, 120-B, 201 of the Indian Penal Code, under section 4(25) of Arms Act, under Section 37(1) r/w. S. 135 of Maharashtra Police Act and under Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. 3.

It is prosecution's case that on 13/06/2021, Applicant and coaccused assaulted the deceased with sickle and murdered him on the ground of old dispute.

4.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that all co-

accused except present applicant have been released on bail, out of which two are minors. Applicant is behind bars for more than 4 years and 9 months. The charge was framed in November, 2025, but thereafter there is no progress in the trial. The Applicant had two antecedents, but he has been acquitted from the said offences and requested to allow the application.

5.

It is contention of learned APP that Applicant and co-accused assaulted the deceased with sickle and murdered him. There is eye witness to the incident. If Applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application. 6.

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

7.

In the first information report, it is specifically mentioned that Applicant and co-accused assaulted the deceased with sickle, whereas in the statements of eye witnesses recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., the role attributed to the Applicant is different. Considering this fact as well as Applicant is behind bars for more than 4 years and 9 moths and there is no progress in the trial. All the co-accused have been released on bail. To prove the case against the Applicant, trial is required. 8.

Considering these facts, I pass following order.

ORDER

(i) The Applicant- Rushabh Dattatray Renuse be released on bail in Crime No.130/2021 registered with Dattawadi Police Station, Dist. 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.)