936 & 937.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 936 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 480 OF 2026 1. Somnath Kashinath Shingate 2. Narendra Shahaji Sonawane VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Another Mr. N. S. Ghanekar, Advocate for Appellants Mrs. P. J. Bharad, APP for Respondent No.1/State Mr. S. E. Shekade, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 937 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 503 OF 2026 1. Kiran Raosaheb Jagdale 2. Harshad @ Harshwardhan Pratap Kakde VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Another Mr. I. D. Maniyar, Advocate for Appellants Mrs. P. J. Bharad, APP for Respondent No.1/State Mr. S. E. Shekade, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 CORAM :R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE :SEPTEMBER 24, 2026 P. C. : 1. Appellants seek bail in connection with C.R. No. 481/2025 registered with Police Station Jamkhed, District Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 118(1), 118(2), 119(2), 324(4), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 351(2), 126(2), 61(2), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act. Page 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AUG:43469 936 & 937.odt 2. In short, it is the case of the prosecution that on 24.08.2025 at about 11.00 pm an incident occurred in which Adarsha, Digvijay, Vaibhav and Yashdeep were assaulted by co-accused. While Yashdeep was taken to the hospital, Appellants and other accused persons obstructed them. There are allegations against present Appellants that they used sticks in order to caused assault. 3. Learned Counsels for the Appellants submit that after conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and now, Appellants cannot be kept in custody by way of pre-trial sentence. In order to support their submissions, they drew attention of the Court to the injury certificates of the witnesses whose injuries could be attributed to the present Appellants. By referring to the injury certificates, they argued that simple injuries were caused to them. It is specifically pointed out that injuries caused to Abhijeet are by sharp edged weapon, which is not attributed to the present Appellants. They, therefore, seek bail of the Appellants. 4. Learned APP and learned Counsel for Informant opposed grant of any relief to the Appellants by referring to the allegations in the FIR, which according to them, are supported by the statements of witnesses so also injury certificates on record. According to them, if the Appellants are enlarged on bail, they are likely to interfere in the evidence of prosecution. 5. Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that the injuries 936 & 937.odt caused to Abhijit are not attributable to the present Appellants. In so far as injuries alleged to have been caused by the Appellants to the other witnesses, they are simple in nature. Having regard to the said fact, this Court finds substance in the contention of learned Counsel for the Appellants that their further custody is not necessary. Needless to say that Appellants cannot be kept in jail by pre-trial sentence. They are not likely to flee from justice. Hence, the order: O R D E R (i) Both Appeals are allowed. (ii) Appellants in connection with C.R. No. 481/2025 registered with Police Station Jamkhed, District Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 118(1), 118(2), 119(2), 324(4), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 351(2), 126(2), 61(2), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 4/25 of the Arms Act, shall be released on bail on furnishing PB and SB of Rs. 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) each with one surety in the like amount. (iii) They shall attend all dates of hearing before Trial Court unless exempted. (iv) They shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly. (v) They shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) Malani