Babasaheb Walmik Rajwade v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 688 OF 2026 Babasaheb Walmik Rajwade ... Applicant

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra and Anr.

... Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Satyajeet P. Dighe a/w. Mr. Abhijeet F. Khade, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. P. P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State.

Mr. Aniket Pawar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 _________________________________________________________________ by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date:

2026.05.11 14:59:12 +0700 SONALI SATISH KILAJE

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 6th MAY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R.No. 512 of 2025 registered with Panchvati Police Station, Nashik, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 118(2), 118(1), 74, 126(2), 127(2), 308(3), 308(4), 189(1), 189(2), 189(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS Act") and Section 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

2.

It is alleged that prior to the incident, applicant threatened the first informant for extortion of money.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that at the time of incident, applicant was not present. The allegations against him are that prior to incident of the present crime, applicant had threatened

first informant for extortion of money. There are no allegations against the applicant except alone. The applicant is behind bars for around six months and requested to allow the application. Learned counsel for the applicant on instructions, submits that the applicant undertakes not to enter in Nashik City till recording evidence of first informant and injured witnesses. 4.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for respondent No.2 that applicant has two antecedents. The applicant threatened first informant. On his say, co-accused assaulted the injured. If he is released on bail, he may threaten prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard all learned counsel. Perused chargesheet and documents produced on record. The allegations against the applicant are of conspiracy. It appears that at the time of incident, applicant was not present. To show his involvement in the crime, evidence is required. The applicant is behind bars for around six months. Investigation is completed. Chargesheet has been filed. The applicant undertakes not to enter in Nashik City till recording evidence of first informant and injured witnesses. Considering these facts, I pass following order :

ORDER

i.

The applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 512 of 2025 registered with Panchvati Police Station, Nashik,

on executing P.R.Bond of Rs. 30,000/- on furnishing one or two sureties in the like amount.

ii.

The applicant shall not enter in Nashik City till recording of evidence of injured witness except attending Court date.

iii.

The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

iv.

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case. 6.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of. All pending applications, if any, disposed of. 7.

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.

8.

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