Anil Santlal Sahu v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 772 OF 2026 Anil Santlal Sahu ....Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and anr.
....Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Shubham S. Sane, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Tejas Kothalikar, Advocate for Respondent No.2. _________________________________________________________________
CORAM
: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 5th MAY, 2026.
P.C. :
1.
By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 66 of 2020 registered with Bhigwan Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 376 and 34 of the the Indian Penal Code 1860 and Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2.
It is prosecution's case that the applicant assaulted the first informant with a blade on her neck with the intention to kill her and left her in an injured condition and ran away from the incident spot. 3.
It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for more than six years, yet the trial is not Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:
2026.05.06 15:00:00 +0530 SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM concluded. The applicant has no antecedents and requested to allow the application.
4.
It is contention of the learned APP along with learned counsel for respondent No. 2 that the applicant carried the victim to drop her at her place, but he forced her to alight from the train and took her to one field and assaulted her on her neck with blade with the intention to kill her and left her abandoned in the said field. The victim was found by witnesses in an injured condition, and in her statement, she has specifically stated about the assault by the applicant. The trial is in progress, and if the applicant is released on bail, he may 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 around six years. The trial is in progress. It may take time to conclude the trial. The applicant has no antecedents. Considering these facts, I pass following order: allowed.
ORDER
(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 66 of 2020 registered with Bhigwan 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.)