912 - BA - 676 - 2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 676 OF 2026 Yash Prashant Soundade … Applicant Versus. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents ------- Ms. Tanvi Tapkire with Ms. Purva Patil for the Applicant. Dr. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State. Koli, Police Constable, MIDC Kupwad Police Station, Sangli is present. ------- CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 23, 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard, Ms. Tanvi Tapkire, learned Advocate for the Applicant, and Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the State. 2. By the present Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 the Applicant seeks regular bail in connection with Crime No. 114 of 2023 registered with the MIDC Kupwad Police Station, Sangli, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 120(B) and 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4 and 25 of the Indian Arms Act and Section 37(1)(3)/135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. VRJ 1 VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Digitally signed by VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Date: 2026.09.23 17:25:59 +0530 912 - BA - 676 - 2026.doc 3. Ms. Tanvi Tapkire, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submits that there are four (4) accused in Crime No. 114 of 2023, with the Applicant as Accused No. 1. She further submits that the said crime is registered as Sessions Case No. 243 of 2023 and is pending trial before the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli (“Trial Court”). 4. Ms. Tanvi Tapkire, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submits that the Applicant's involvement in Crime No. 114 of 2023 is similar to that of Pratik Vagare (Accused No. 2). She submits that Accused No. 2 is alleged to have assaulted the victim with a sword and the Applicant is similarly alleged to have assaulted the victim with a sword. She refers to the order dated 22nd May 2026 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5586 of 2026, by which the Accused No. 2 (Pratik Vagare), is released on bail. She relies on paragraph No. 2 of the said order, which reads thus: “2) In furtherance to the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 14.05.2026, the eye-witnesses have been examined now. However, as submitted, out of the total of 41 witnesses, the prosecution wishes to examine 28 witnesses, out of them 03 have been examined including the two eye- witnesses. The period of custody of the petitioner by this time is more than 2 years and 10 months. Looking to the number of witnesses, the trial may take some time to conclude. However, considering all the attending circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to release the petitioner on bail.” 5. Ms. Tanvi Tapkire, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submits that as Accused No. 2 was released on identical facts, the Applicant VRJ 2 912 - BA - 676 - 2026.doc would be entitled to bail on the ground of parity. 6. Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP for the State, submits that although the involvement of the Applicant (Accused No. 1) and Accused No. 2 in Crime No. 114 of 2023 is similar, there is one difference, namely, the sword was recovered at the instance of the Applicant. 7. Perused the record and the order dated 22nd May 2026 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5586 of 2026. 8. The Applicant was arrested on 10th June 2023. The Trial Court, rejected the Applicant's Bail Application No. 30 of 2026 on 30th June 2026. 9. As submitted by Ms. Tanvi Tapkire, learned Advocate for the Applicant and not contested by Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP, the role assigned to the Applicant in Crime No. 114 of 2023 is like that of Accused No. 2. Accused No. 2 has been released on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 22nd May 2026. 10. Though Dr. A. A. Takalkar, learned APP, submits that there is a difference in the Applicant's case, inasmuch as the sword used in the crime by the Applicant and Accused No. 2 was recovered at the Applicant's instance, the involvement of the Applicant and Accused No. 2 in Crime No. 114 of 2023 being similar is not in dispute. VRJ 3 912 - BA - 676 - 2026.doc 11. In view of the above, Ms. Tanvi Tapkire, learned Advocate for the Applicant, would be justified in seeking bail on the ground of parity. 12. This Application is therefore allowed on the following terms: (a) The Applicant in Crime No. 114 of 2023 registered with MIDC Kupwad Police Station, Sangli, shall be released on bail upon furnishing a PR bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court in Sessions Case No. 243 of 2023. (b) The Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade that person from disclosing the facts to the Court or any police officer. Applicant shall not tamper with evidence in any manner. (c) The Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer, MIDC Kupwad Police Station, District Sangli, on the second Monday of each month from 10:00 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. till the conclusion of trial in Sessions Case No. 243 of 2023. (d) The Applicant shall regularly appear before the Trial Court in Sessions Case No. 243 of 2023, whenever the matter is fixed, unless specifically exempted. VRJ 4 912 - BA - 676 - 2026.doc (e) If the Applicant absents himself from appearing before the Trial Court on the date fixed, the same would be considered as a breach of condition and the Trial Court would be at liberty to pass appropriate orders. 13. Bail Application No.676 of 2026 is disposed of. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) VRJ 5