Ganesh Nanasaheb Gaikwad v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1058 OF 2026 Ganesh Nanasaheb Gaikwad ...Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

_________________________________________________________________ VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date:

2026.04.24 12:54:39 +0530 Mr. Sudeep Pasbola, Senior counsel a/w. Sandeep S. Salunkhe, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. P.P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State.

PSI Nagnath Javale, Sangvi Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad present. _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 21st APRIL, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant.

2.

Learned APP tenders affidavit in reply. It is taken on record. 3.

Heard learned senior counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the State.

4.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 338 of 2021 registered with Sangvi Police Station, District Pune (subsequently numbered as SPl. MCOCA Case No. 551 of 2022), for the offenes punishable under Sections 395 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 3(25) of the Indian Arms Act and Section 39 of the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014 and U/s. 3(1) (ii), 3(4) of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), 1999. 5.

It is prosecution's case that in October-2019, the applicant

forcibly took the first informant in his vehicle to his NSC farmhouse at Sus,Pun and assaulted him with fists and kick blows as he was not paying amount demanded by the applicant. It is alleged that thereafter the father of applicant fired three rounds from his pistol in the air to threaten the first informant. Thereafter the co-accused called the applicant and assaulted the first informant with the intention to kill him and forcibly took away all the articles lying in the garage of the first informant. 6.

It is contention of learned senior counsel for the applicant that there is two years' delay in lodging the complaint. The Applicant is behind bars for more than four years. There is no progress in the trial. The coaccused, having similar allegations, has been released on bail. It may take time to conclude the trial and requested to allow the application. 7.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant is a habitual offender. He has many antecedents. He kidnapped the first informant in his car with the intention to kill him. The applicant forcibly took away equipment kept in the garage of the first informant. If applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the first informant and prosecution witnesses. 8.

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused the charge-sheet and documents produced on record. The applicant is behind bars for more than four years. There is two years' delay in lodging the complaint. The co-accused, having similar allegations, has been released on bail. It may

take time to conclude the trial.

9.

Considering these facts, I pass following order:

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 338 of 2021 registered with Sangvi Police Station, District Pune (subsequently numbered as Spl. MCOCA Case No. 551 of 2022), 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.

10.

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.

11.

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