Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10231 (BOM)

BAPU SHIVAJI SAINDANE AND ANOTHER v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

APEAL/707/2026 · 2026-09-22

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

940-APEAL-707-2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 940 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 707 OF 2026 1. Bapu Shivaji Saindane 2. Amol S/o Popat Musmade VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Another Mr. K. N. Shermale, Advocate for Appellant Mrs. P. J. Bharad, APP for Respondent No. 1 Mr. J. S. Jain, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 (appointed) CORAM :R.M. JOSHI, J DATE :SEPTEMBER 22, 2026 P. C. : 1. Mentioned out of turn. Considering the urgency in the matter, matter is taken up for hearing at the bottom of board. 2. This Appeal is for the release o the Appellants on bail by setting aside order dated 03.08.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, Ahmednagar below Exhibit 20 in Special Case No. 159/2017. By this order, Application filed by the Appellants for enlargement on bail came to be rejected. 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellants makes statement that the Appellants are taken in custody on 18.07.2026 for non-appearance before the trial Court. On instructions, he makes statement that the Appellants would attend each date of hearing before Trial Court unless exempted by specific order passed by the Court. He further makes statement, on instructions, that in case the Appellants fail to remain present during the 2026:BHC-AUG:42955 940-APEAL-707-2026.odt hearing before trial Court, it would be open for the Trial Court to keep them in custody till conclusion of trial. 4. Learned APP and learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2/Informant vehemently opposed the Appeal. It is their contention that Appellants are granted bail, however, instead of cooperating in trial, Appellants remain absent before trial Court and thereby delay the proceedings. 5. The undertaking given by the Counsel for the Appellants, on instructions, is sufficient to take care of the apprehension of the prosecution as well as Informant. The said undertaking given on instructions is accepted by the Court. Relying upon the said undertaking, following order is passed: O R D E R (i) Criminal Appeal is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’. (ii) Appellants be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 277/2016 registered with Rahuri Police Station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 326, 324, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, on furnishing PB and SB of Rs. 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) each with one surety in the like amount. (iii) Bail before trial Court. (iv) Fees of appointed Counsel for Respondent No. 2 is quantified at Rs.10,000/-. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) Malani