Pandurang @ Panda Balaji Kamble v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3846 OF 2025 Pandurang @ Panda Balaji Kamble ...

Applicant

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra ...

Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Niranjan Bhavake a/w. Ms. Dristi Madhani, Mr. Anurag Ramekar and Ms. Vaishnavi Chore, Advocates for Applicant. Mr. S.M.Mangaonkar, APP for Respondent-State. PSI - Dipak Nikam, Talegaon Dabhade Police Station, present. _________________________________________________________________ by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date:

2026.03.13 11:10:33 +0700 SONALI SATISH KILAJE

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 11th MARCH, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R.No. 320 of 2024 registered with Talegaon Dabhade Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 308, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"), Sections 3(25) and 3(27) of Arms Act, Sections 37(1)(3) r/w. 135 of Maharashtra Police Act and Sections 3 and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (for short "MCOC Act") 2.

It is prosecution's case that on 20.06.2024, at around 8.10 a.m. to 8.30 a.m., applicant and co-accused fired from a pistol at public place to create terror in the said area.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the allegations of firing shots from pistol are against the co-accused. The applicant was a pillion rider on the motorcycle of the co-accused. The applicant is behind bars for more than one year and seven months. It may take time to conclude the trial. Hence, requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP that the the applicant has antecedents. The pistol and live cartridges are recovered at the instance of the applicant. If the applicant released on bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application. 5.

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused chargesheet and documents produced on record. The co-accused, having similar allegations, have been released on bail. The allegations of firing are against the co-accused. To show the involvement of the applicant in the crime, evidence is required. The applicant is behind bars for more than one year and seven months. There is no progress in the trial. Considering these facts, I pass following order.

ORDER

i.

The applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 320 of 2024 registered with Talegaon Dabhade Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, Pune, on executing P.R.Bond of Rs. 30,000/- on furnishing 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. 6.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of. All pending applications, if any, disposed of. 7.

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.

8.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)