Sanket Subhash Singar v. The State Of Maharashtra
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1976 OF 2026 Sanket Subhash Singar ...Applicant
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra
...Respondent
WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO.9670 OF 2026 by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date:
2026.05.08 12:03:42 +0530 NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1976 OF 2026 Bank of Maharashtra Thr. Vinod Kumar ...Applicant
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra
...Respondent
____________________________________________________________ Mr.Sachin Gite, for the Applicant.
Mr.M.G. Patil, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr.Vivekanand Krishnan, for the Intervenor.
Mr.Ramdas Shelake, Senior P.I., EOW, Nashik City. ____________________________________________________________
CORAM
: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 7th MAY 2026 P.C. :
.
By this Application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.72 of 2025 registered with Gangapur Police Station, Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(5) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ('BNS' for short). 2.
It is prosecution's case that the Applicant had obtained loan from Bank of Maharashtra in the name of his wife under the scheme of Chief
Minister Employment Generation Programme (for short 'CMEGP'), though they were not entitled for the said loan. It is alleged that a subsidy of Rs.17,50,000/- was given to the Applicant under the scheme. 3.
It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the Applicant has deposited entire subsidy amount with the bank. The Applicant is behind bars for more than six months. The Applicant has no antecedents. There is no progress in trial, and requested to allow the Application.
4.
It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the Applicant obtained subsidy though he was not entitled for the subsidy and cheated the bank. If the Applicant released on bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the Application.
5.
I have heard all learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.
6.
The Applicant has deposited the entire subsidy amount. The coaccused having similar allegations has been released on bail. The Applicant is behind bars for more than six months. The Applicant has no antecedents. There is no progress in trial. It may take time to conclude the trial. 7.
Considering these facts, I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) The Applicant be released on bail in Crime No.72 of 2025 registered with Gangapur Police Station, Nashik, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.
(iv) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required.
(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (vi) All pending Applications are disposed of.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)