Rahul Sangram Waghmare v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 919 OF 2026 Rahul Sangram Waghmare ... Applicant

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra ... Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Amit Icham a/w. Mr. Chaitanya Purankar, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S.M.Mangaonkar. APP for Respondent-State. Mr. Akshay Patil, PSI - Nigadi Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad, present. _________________________________________________________________ SONALI SATISH KILAJE by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date:

2026.04.22 10:58:55 +0700

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 20th APRIL, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 304 of 2018 registered with Nigadi Police Station, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 394, 395, 397, 120-B, 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"), Section 4(25) of the Arms Act and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. 2.

It is prosecution's case that the first informant is a custodian of Checkmate Services. The company of the first informant collects cash from various finance companies and deposits it in ICICI Bank. It is stated that on 3rd May 2018, when the first informant had collected cash from companies and proceeding in a Mahindra Bolero Jeep, at that time, one person came

near the first informant and put a knife on his neck demanding the cash bag. When the first informant refused to give the bag, the said person assaulted the first informant with that knife, and during the scuffle, he snatched the bag and ran away on a motorcycle. 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for four years and two months. Yet trial is not concluded. The co-accused against whom similar allegations are levelled has been released on bail. Hence, the applicant is entitled for bail on principle of parity and requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was employee of Checkmate Services. He was one of the conspirators of the offence. Out of the robbed amount Rs.5,98,650/- is recovered at the instance of the applicant. It shows his involvement in the crime. Hence, requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused chargesheet and documents produced on record. The co-accused Sagar Khatal against whom similar allegations are levelled has been released on bail. Hence, the applicant is entitled for bail on principle of parity. Considering these facts, I pass following order.

ORDER

i.

The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 304 of

2018 registered with Nigadi Police Station, Pune, on executing P.R.Bond of Rs. 30,000/- on furnishing 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. 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.)