Bapu Appa Mangave v. The State Of Maharashtra

931-139-26-ia.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI-INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 139 OF 2026 IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 287 OF 2020 Bapu Appa Mangave

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Mr. Tejas Hilage, Advocate for Applicant Mr. Nitin B. Patil APP for the State CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE : 7th MAY 2026.

P. C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant seeks relaxation of condition of clause (ii) of the operative part of the order of this Court dated IRESH MASHAL 10/03/2021 in Cri. Bail Application No. 287/2020, wherein the Digitally signed by IRESH MASHAL Date:

2026.05.08 16:30:15 +0530 applicant was restrained from entering the jurisdiction of the Kolhapur district, except for attending the dates of trial Court. 2.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the matter is of the year 2015 and even after the period of 10 years, the trial is yet to conclude. The applicant is an old person aged 75 years suffering from various ailments. The said condition is causing hardship to the Iresh 1 of

931-139-26-ia.doc applicant as well as his family. The applicant has never misused the liberty so granted to the applicant. As such, in the interest of justice, the application may be allowed.

3.

Learned APP has opposed the application submitting that if the application is allowed, the applicant may misuse the liberty and frustrate the purpose of trial.

4.

Having heard the submissions of both the sides and perusal of the record indicates that the applicant was granted bail by the aforesaid order in the year 2021. Over the period of five years, the trial is still under progress. Admittedly, there is nothing on record to indicate that the applicant has misused the liberty granted by this Court.

5.

In view of the aforesaid and keeping in view the age of the applicant, I am of the considered opinion that the condition for bail granted by this Court by the earlier order can be relaxed as the same does not seem to cause any prejudice to the prosecution. 6.

Resultantly, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b).

[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.] Iresh 2 of