Sandip Shankar Shekade v. The State Of Maharashtra

2026:BHC-AUG:20986 {1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 527 OF 2026 SANDIP SHANKAR SHEKADE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER .

...

Mr. P.R. Nangare, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. P.D. Patil, APP for respondent.

CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.

DATE : 6th MAY, 2026.

P.C. :- 1.

The applicant has approached this court seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 66 of 2026, registered with Pathardi Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 119-1, 118-1, 352, 351-2 r/w. 3-5 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.

2.

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the present crime. Even if the allegations are taken to be true, the assault attributed to the applicant is not on vital part of the complainant. The complainant himself is a notorious goon of the village, against whom there are several offences registered. One such offence is FIR No. 34 of 2013 dated 5.12.2013. All other co-accused are already released on anticipatory bail, except the present applicant, against whom there is a recovery shown. The applicant is not having any criminal antecedents and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the applicant may be protected.

3.

As against this, the learned APP strongly opposes the

{2} application on the ground that the applicant is involved in a serious offence of voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapon i.e. stick. The injury certificate of complainant Devidas Bhabad corroborates the allegations in the FIR. There are eye witnesses to the incident. The applicant, if released on bail, there is every likelihood that he may again commit a cognizable offence. As such, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the application may be rejected. 4.

I have gone through the investigation papers made available by the learned APP. The FIR filed on record shows that there are several allegations against the complainant Devidas by the villagers. The investigation appears to have been almost complete. Further investigation, if any, can be done without custodial interrogation of the applicant. The apprehension of the APP can be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions. Hence, I am inclined to protect the applicant and pass the following order :- O R D E R.

[I] In the event of arrest of the applicants, in connection with Crime No.66 of 2026, registered with Pathardi Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 119-1, 118-1, 352, 351-2 r/w. 3-5 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, the applicant Sandip Shankar Shekade, be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount, on the following conditions :- [a] The applicant shall attend the concerned police station and report to the Investigating Officer on every Sunday between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. till filing of charge sheet. [b] The applicant shall not enter the village Karegaon, Taluka Pathardi, except with the permission of the concerned Police Station Officer till filing of charge

{3} sheet.

[c] The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

[d] The applicant shall submit his Aadhar and Pan card to the Investigating Officer alongwith mobile numbers and addresses of two of his near relatives.

[e] The application stands disposed of.

[MEHROZ K. PATHAN] JUDGE.

grt/-