Rohit Ganeshraj Kasabe v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 889 OF 2026 Rohit Ganeshraj Kasabe ....Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Vipul Dushing along with Mr. Ajay Gawali i/b. Mr. Ajay Gurav, Advocate for Applicant.

Ms. Kranti Hivrale, APP for Respondent-State. PSI-Shashikant S. Gadekar, Sant Tukaram Nagar Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, Pune, present.

_________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 29th APRIL, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 163 of 2025 registered with Sant Tukaram Nagar Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 352, 191(1), 191(2), 191(3) and 190 the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 37(1) read with Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, Section 4(25) of the Arms Act and Section 3(1)(ii) and 3(4) of the the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999. SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM 2.

It is prosecution's case that the applicant and co-accused assaulted the friend of the first informant and the first informant with the SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.05.05 11:04:25 +0530 intention to kill them.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the main allegations are against the co-accused who assaulted the injured with a sharp weapon with the intention to kill him. The allegation against the applicant is that he assaulted the first informant. The applicant is behind bars for more than 10 months. There is no progress in the trial. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant is a member of a crime syndicate and assaulted the first informant with the intention to kill him. 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 tcharge sheet and documents produced on record.

6.

It appears from the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. of the first informant and injured that the main allegations are against accused No. 1. The applicant is behind bars for more than 10 months. The investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed. Considering these facts, I pass the following order.

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 163 of 2025 registered with Sant Tukaram Nagar 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.

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.)