Anirudha Alias Prem Dattaguru Madav v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 344 OF 2026 ANIRUDHA ALIAS PREM DATTAGURU MADAV
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. D. M. Latake a/w Mr. Nikhil D. Gore and Mr. Pritam P. Gurav APP for Respondents : Mr. Nitin B. Patil ...
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 04-05-2026 PER COURT:- 1.
The applicant seeks regular bail in Crime No.687 of 2025 dated 22.10.2025 registered with Shivajinagar Police Station, District Kolhapur, for the offences under sections 75(1), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 352, 351(2), 118(1) and 115(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
The prosecution case is that on 21 October 2025 at about 10:00 PM, her daughter-in-law Sumaiyya Amir Pathan was proceeding accompanied with her husband. While they were passing on the road, their neighbor Datta/co-accused allegedly, passed obscene remarks and made inappropriate gestures towards her, causing embarrassment. When husband questioned
his conduct, Datta along with Prem /present Applicant, and other co-accused allegedly gathered and formed an unlawful assembly with an intent of creating terror, being armed with weapons such as iron sickles, stones, bricks and wooden sticks. They then assaulted Amir Pathan and Sumaiyya Pathan, during which Applicant allegedly abused and threatened and attacked Sumaiyya with a sickle causing injury, while Datta abused in obscene language and hit Amir Pathan on the head with a stone causing injury, and Akshay Bhonge and others also beat the complainant and her family members with sticks and physical force. When the others tried to intervene, the Accused assault them. Hence, the report.
3.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. There is no prima facie case against the applicant. There is unexplained delay in lodging the report. The injuries suffered by the injured/daughter-in-law of the first informant are simple in nature. The applicant is young. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The investigation is completed. The chargesheet is filed. Co-accused Nos.3 to 6 are released on bail. Hence, prayed to admit the applicant to bail on the ground of parity.
4.
The learned APP opposed the application and submitted that
the applicant and co-accused assaulted the daughter-in-law of the first informant. If the applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.
5.
Upon considering the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.P.P. and perusal of the material on record including the chargesheet, indicates that the applicant is in custody for more than 6 months. In the meantime, the coaccused is enlarged on bail by this Court vide order in BA/3672/2025 dated 17.12.2025, while the other co-accused are released on bail by the trial Court. Thus, further continued incarceration of the applicant would be unjustified. 6.
Nevertheless, the investigation is complete for all intent and purpose, resultantly, the chargesheet is filed. Having regard to the number of the accused and the witnesses which the prosecution proposes to examine, it is very unlikely that the trial can be commenced and concluded within a reasonable period. As such, further incarceration, in the circumstances of the case, does not seem to be either warranted or justifiable. 7.
In that view of the matter, I am persuaded to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant. Hence, the order:-
ORDER
(i) The bail application is allowed.
(ii) Applicant, Anirudha @ Prem Dattaguru Madav, be released on bail, on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand) with one or two local solvent sureties, in the like amount, in connection with Crime No.687 of 2025 dated 22.10.2025 registered with Shivajinagar Police Station, District Kolhapur, for the offences under sections 75(1), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 352, 351(2), 118(1) and 115(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the following conditions :- (a) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner. (b) The applicant shall attend the trial on each and every date unless exempted by the trial Court.
(c) The applicant shall submit Aadhar and Pan Cards to the Investigating Officer and detailed address and phone numbers and two of the near relatives.
(d) In case of breach of any of the conditions by the applicant, it is open for the Prosecution to move the concerned Court seeking cancellation of bail, notwithstanding the fact that this Court has granted bail to the Applicant. (iii) Needless to state that the observations rendered herein are to the extent of this application and the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same.
[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.] rrd