Omkar Rajendra Mane v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 678 OF 2026 Omkar Rajendra Mane ....Applicant

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Vipul V. Dushing along with Mr. Ashraf Kazi, Mr. Prajyot Shinde, Mr.Pranay Mahajan, Mr. Ashish Saxena and Mr. Swapnil Kshirsagar, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. S. S. Pednekar, APP for Respondent-State. WPSI-Priyanka Nikam, Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, Pune, present. _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 27th MARCH, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 500 of 2024 registered with Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 149 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, Section 4(25) and 5(27) of Indian Arms Act and Section 37(1)(3) read with Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

2.

It is prosecution's case that on 15th June 2024, the applicant and accused assaulted the son of the first informant with sword with the Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:

2026.04.01 10:57:53 +0530 intention to kill him.

SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for more than 21 months, yet there is no progress in the trial. The applicant has no antecedents. The co-accused, against whom similar allegations are made, has been released on bail. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was carrying a sword and he assaulted the injured and his friend with the sword. It shows his involvement in the crime. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. The applicant is behind bars for more than 21 months. There is no progress in the trial. The applicant has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial. The co-accused, against whom similar allegations are made, has been released on bail. Considering these facts I pass the following order:

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 500 of 2024 registered with Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, District Pune, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with 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.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

6.

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.

7.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)