Rutik Balu Chavan v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1310 OF 2026 Rutik Balu Chavan ....Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Shreyas Barsawade along with Mr. Sanket Mane, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State. PSI-S.K.Chavan, Shirur Police Station, Pune, _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 10th JUNE, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

The applicant is apprehending arrest in Crime No.235 of 2026 registered with Shirur Police Station, District Pune, for offences punishable under Sections 109, 189(2), 191(2), 351(2)(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 3, 25, 27 of the Arms Act and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

2.

It is prosecution's case that on 19th March 2026, the applicant and co-accused fired at the first informant and his friend with the intention to kill them. It is alleged that the applicant pelted stones at the first informant and his friend.

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:

2026.06.12 11:08:53 +0530 SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the allegations against the applicant are of pelting stones and not of firing

from pistol. The co-accused- Digambar Shendkar, having similar allegations, has been released on anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court. Hence, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required, and requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant and co-accused assaulted the first informant and his friend due to an old dispute. The co-accused fired at the first informant and his friend with the intention to kill them. The applicant was part of the group and pelted stones at the first informant and his friend, it shows his involvement in the crime. The applicant has one antecedents. His custodial interrogation is required, and requested to reject the application. 5.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused FIR and documents produced on record. The allegations against the applicant are of pelting stones at the first informant and his friend. Considering the allegations against the applicant, his custodial interrogation is not required, and I pass following order:

ORDER

(i) In the event of arrest, the applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.235 of 2026 registered with Shirur 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.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.

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.)