Pruthviraj Sanjay Kadam v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.100 OF 2026 Pruthviraj Sanjay Kadam .....Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

.....Respondents Mr. Somnath Thengal, for the Applicant.

Mr. Pankaj P. Deokar, APP, for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State. Mr. Amol Deshinge, for the Respondent No.3.

Mr. Nilesh Prakash Nazare, PC/2010, Juna Rajwada Police Station is present.

CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.

DATED : 16th FEBRUARY 2026 P.C.:- 1.

The Applicant is arrested in Crime Registration No.10 of 2026 registered with Juna Rajwada Police Station, District Kolhapur for the offences punishable under Sections 309(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ('BNS').

It is the case of the prosecution that on 1st January 2026 at about 3:30 p.m. the complainant, who is the photographer has received a phone call from one unknown person and informed that he wanted to take photographs with a vehicle at Irani Khan. When he went there, two persons were present there and when he asked 1/4

them whether they called him to take photographs, they agreed. Thereafter, he took out his camera from bag. At that time, four unknown persons came on bike. They robbed him. They took his camera by showing knife and ran away.

3.

The counsel for Applicant has stated that this Applicant is the person, who called him and he was not in contact with those said four persons, who took the camera by showing the knife to him. They were not in contact with each other. As the Applicant was there on the spot, he was taken in custody.

4.

The complainant has no grievance against this Applicant. He has filed an affidavit to that effect. He appeared through the counsel and the counsel has also stated that the complainant has no grievance against this Applicant.

5.

The learned APP opposed the application stating that the mobile number of this Applicant was reflected in the FIR and from CDR it appears that the accused persons and this Applicant were in contact with each other. There was conspiracy between this Applicant and the co-accused. Hence, prayed to reject the application.

2/4

6.

Heard learned counsel appearing for both the parties. 7.

The complainant appeared through Advocate and has stated that he has no grievance against this Applicant. The role of this Applicant is that he called the complainant with his camera to take photographs with the vehicle and therefore, said incident took place. As the complainant has no grievance and has given no objection to release him on bail, the case is made out to grant the bail. Hence, the Application is allowed on the following terms and conditions : i) The Applicant, namely, Pruthviraj Sanjay Kadam shall be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with his recent self-attested photograph and surety of the like amount on the following conditions at the satisfaction of the investigating officer;

ii) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; iii) The Applicant shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police; iv) The Applicant shall maintain law and order;

3/4

v) The Applicant shall, at the time of execution of the bond, furnish his address and mobile number to the investigating officer, and the court concerned, and shall not change the residence till the final disposal of the case; vi) The Applicant shall regularly remain present during the trial, and cooperate with the learned trial Court to complete the trial for the above offences.

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date:

2026.02.17 19:21:49 +0530 RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD 4/4