Sahebrao Gnayu Ingale v. The State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 71 CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2517 OF 2025
1. Sahebrao Gnayu Ingale
2. Bhaskar Nivrutti Randive
3. Santosh Tukaram Mane ...Applicants
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra and Anr.
...Respondents
Digitally signed by SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Date:
2026.01.27 19:18:00 +0530 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 160 OF 2026 SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2517 OF 2025 Ranjit Baburao Pawar (Hanmar) ...Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :
Sahebrao Gnayu Ingale & Ors.
...Applicants
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Respondents
Mr. Amolkumar Jadhav (Through V.C.) a/w Ms. Tanvi Lad and Ms. Pragati Gurav, Advocate for Applicants.
Mr. Rahul B. Khot, Advocate for Intervenor in I.A. Mr. P. P. Deokar, APP for the Respondent-State.
CORAM
:
NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.
DATE :
27th JANUARY 2026.
P.C.
INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 160 OF 2026 : 1.
For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
2.
The applicant is permitted to intervene in the anticipatory bail application.
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2517 OF 2025 : 3.
By this application, applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.146 of 2025 registered with Aundh Police Station, District: Satara for the offences punishable under Sections 305, 308, 309, 310, 312, 329(3), 325, 134, 190 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
4.
The prosecution case in short is that the First Information Report is lodged by the informant - Ranjit Baburao Pawar (Hanmar) against 11 accused persons i.e. Kiran Kamble, Jivan Kamble, Saurabh Kamble, Ganesh Moreshwar Kamble, Siddharth Kamble, Chandralekha Nakhate, wives of Kiran Kamble and Jivan Kamble and the applicants. On 19.09.2025, 10.10.2025 and 19.09.2025, all the accused persons obstructed the informant and his family members from harvesting the Maize. His wife was manhandled. They prohibited the informant from starting the electric pump and abuses were given in filthy language. The connection to the electric pump was disconnected and some poisonous substance/powder was added in the water tank and spoiled the water. All of them were detained at
one place for four to five hours under the threat of chopper and wooden log.
5.
Heard learned Advocate for Applicants, learned APP for the Respondent-State and learned Advocate for the informant. Perused the record.
6.
Admittedly, there are previous civil disputes between the informant and the main accused. The applicants/accused have allegedly participated in the crime at the instance of the main accused. In the FIR there is no specific role attributed to the applicants. In the investigation papers also it appears that vague and general allegations are levelled against the applicants. Prima facie possibility cannot be ruled out that due to previous disputes, the applicants being friends of the accused are implicated in the present crime.
7.
The applicants were granted interim protection on 19.12.2025. In the facts of the present case, custodial interrogation of the applicants/accused is not necessary.
8.
In the result, application is allowed by confirming interim protection granted to the applicants vide order dated 19.12.2025. 9.
Till filing of charge-sheet, the applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer.
10.
The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)