Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 11846 (BOM)

JANKU BAPURAO YELE AND ANR v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

BA/3621/2026 · 2026-09-28

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

9. BA 3621-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3621 OF 2026 1. Janku Bapurao Yele .Applicants 2. Vivak Janku Yele Vs. The State of Maharashtra .Respondent Mr. Amit Sale a/w. Mr. Vaibhav Ugle, Advocates, for the Applicants Mr. Y. M. Nakhwa, APP, for the Respondent – State Mr. Abhishek Ulhas Arote, Advocate, for Respondent No.2/Complainant CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : 28.09.2026 P. C. 1. Heard Mr. Sale, learned Counsel for the Applicants, Mr. Nakhwa, learned APP for the Respondent – State and Mr. Arote, learned Counsel for the Complainant. 2. This Application is filed in connection with C.R.No. 485 of 2026 registered with Shirur Police Station, Pune for offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(2), 118(1), 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 351(3) & 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”). 3. The Applicants are arraigned as Accused Nos. 2 & 4. The Applicants and the injured Victim, who is the Complainant are all family members belonging to the same family. There is a land dispute Anand 1 of 5 ANAND SUDHAKAR SUDAME Digitally signed by ANAND SUDHAKAR SUDAME Date: 2026.09.29 15:07:53 +0530 9. BA 3621-2026.doc amongst them with regard to determination and entitlement of share as also vahivat. The record which is placed before me to which Mr. Sale has referred to prima facie shows that there are several past incidents in the form of crimes registered qua and against both the parties by either of the parties and it is for the same cause of action. Just one month prior to the present incident in question which took place on 25.05.2026, there was a crime registered against both the parties before me emanating and arising out of the same cause of action. It is seen that in the present case, FIR is lodged after a hiatus of three days especially when it is the case of the prosecution that the Complainant’s brother was grievously injured. The Injury Certificates are appended at page Nos. 63 to 65. It prima facie show only one grievous injury, whereas rest of the injuries are simple. Be that as it may, the motive of the crime is clear. Though it is argued vehemently by the prosecution that threats have been administered to eliminate and finish the injured victim that is bound to happen when tension escalates in family members and both families suffer and are at the receiving end. However, considering the nature of the lis and also the fact that parties from both sides having been involved and have also been injured in the incident in question, I am inclined to accept the case of the Applicants for grant of bail. I am also informed that both parties are actively Anand 2 of 5 9. BA 3621-2026.doc considering reconciliation of their long standing feud. However, this is not the reason for grant of bail. 4. Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and finding, Bail Application of Applicants is allowed subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) Applicants – Janku Bapurao Yele and Vivak Janku Yele are directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with CR. No. 485 of 2026; (ii) Applicants are directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) each with one surety of the like amount; (iii) Applicants shall report to the Investigating Officer at Shirur Police Station, Pune , once every month, on the first Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. until commencement of trial and thereafter shall attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court; (iv) Applicants shall co-operate with the conduct of the trial and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted. Applicants shall not seek Anand 3 of 5 9. BA 3621-2026.doc unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail; (v) Applicants shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court; (vi) Applicants shall not influence any of the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (vii) Applicants shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of their current residential addresses and mobile telephone numbers and shall forthwith inform the Investigating Officer of any change in their residential addresses or mobile telephone numbers, as and when such change occurs; and (viii)Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to the Applicants. 5. 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 Anand 4 of 5 9. BA 3621-2026.doc hereinabove in this order. 6. Bail Applications are allowed and disposed in the above terms. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) Anand 5 of 5