44-ba-3497-25.doc IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.3497 OF 2025 Sagar Madhukar Landge .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents ....................  Ms. Pooja Agarwal (through VC) a/w Mr. Prakash Chavan and Mr. Ashraf Kazi, Advocates for Applicant.  Mr. Yogesh Nakhwa, APP for Respondent No.1 - State.  Mr. Shantanu Nakashe, Advocate appointed through Legal Aid for Respondent No.2. ................… CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 22, 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard Ms. Agarwal (through VC), learned Advocate for Applicant, Mr. Nakhwa, learned APP for Respondent No.1 - State and Mr. Nakashe, learned Advocate appointed through Legal Aid for Respondent No.2 - prosecutrix. 2. By this Bail Application, Applicant is seeking enlargement on bail in C.R. No. 51 of 2025 registered with Vimantal Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 70(1), 64(2)(m), 126(2), 127(3), 299, 115(2), 352, 351(2)(3) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(25) of the Arms Act, 1959. 3. With the able assistance of the learned Advocates I have perused the material placed on record. Prima facie the FIR statement lodged on 23.01.2025 is with regard to the four specific episodes between 25.05.2024 and 03.10.2024 and it prima facie shows that the prosecutrix/first informant was infact in a live-in-relationship with the Meera Jadhav 1 of 4 MEERA MAHESH JADHAV Digitally signed by MEERA MAHESH JADHAV Date: 2026.09.23 13:43:10 +0530 44-ba-3497-25.doc present Applicant. There is prima facie material placed on record placed by the prosecution in the form of witness statements of the house owner as also the neighbour, to whom the prosecutrix/first informant had conveyed that the Applicant was her husband and they both were the husband and wife. 4. In view of the relationship between the Applicant and prosecutrix/first informant turning sour and they having constant fights the present FIR was filed on 23.01.2025. FIR came to be lodged after a substantial delay and that itself renders the lodging of FIR suspicious in the above circumstances. If the version narrated by the first informant is to be believed, then, in fact, after the first alleged episode, stated to have occurred on 24.04.2025, there was no reason whatsoever for the her to return to and reside with the present Applicant thereafter. 5. The allegations of extortion and blackmailing levelled against the Applicant also do not, prima facie, stand substantiated at this stage, as there is no material placed on record by the prosecution in support thereof. The delay in lodging the FIR, in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, therefore, cannot enure to the benefit of the first informant. The Applicant has made out a clear case for grant of bail. The Applicant is therefore granted bail. Meera Jadhav 2 of 4 44-ba-3497-25.doc 6. In view of the above the following order is passed:- (i) Applicant – Sagar Madhukar Landge is directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with Crime No. 51 of 2025; (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at Vimantal Police Station, once every month on the first Sunday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.; (iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted and will not take any unnecessary adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the prosecution to apply for revocation of this order; (v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court; (vi) Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of his current address and mobile contact number and / or Meera Jadhav 3 of 4 44-ba-3497-25.doc change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time, as applicable; and (viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail granted to the Applicant. 7. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are limited for the purpose of granting bail only and I have not made any observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made hereinabove in this order. 8. This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by Mr. Nakashe, learned Advocate appointed through the Legal Aid to espouse the cause of Respondent No. 2 (prosecutrix). His fees be paid by the High Court Legal Aid Services Authority as per rules on production of a server copy of this order and other compliances in accordance with the decision of this Court in the case of Sanjyot Nitin Telharkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr1 and the Schedule under Regulation 18(1) of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority Rules, 1998. 9. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 1 Judgment dated 25.09.2024 passed in Misc. Civil Application No.134 of 2024. Meera Jadhav 4 of 4