Santosh Madhukar Manjare v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3886 OF 2025 Santosh Madhukar Manjare ... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. S.R.Agarkar, APP for the Respondent-State. PSI - Pinjari S.N., South Mahalunge Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, present.

_________________________________________________________________ by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date:

2026.04.10 11:13:15 +0700 SONALI SATISH KILAJE

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 8th APRIL, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R.No. 578 of 2021 registered with Chakan Police Station, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 120-B, 201, 216, 143, 147, 148, 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"), Section 4(25) and 27 of Indian Arms Act, Sections 37(1)(3) and 135 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections 3(1)(i)(ii), 3(4) of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999.

2.

It is prosecution's case that on 14.05.2021, co-accused murdered the deceased on the ground of old dispute. It is alleged that the applicant was one of the main conspirators of the present crime.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that applicant's name is not mentioned in FIR. Accused Nos. 10 and 12 have been enlarged on bail. The applicant is behind bars for almost five years. The applicant was not present at the incident spot. It may take time to conclude the trial. Hence, requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant conspired with the co-accused to kill the deceased on the ground of old dispute. Accordingly, deceased was murdered by the co-accused. The applicant was actually involved in the commission of crime. If the applicant is 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 allegations against the applicant are of conspiracy. To prove it, evidence required. The applicant is behind bars for almost five years. The co-accused having similar allegations has been released on bail. Considering these facts, I pass following order.

ORDER

i.

The applicant be enlarged on bail inC.R.No. 578 of 2021 registered with Chakan Police Station, 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.)