RB54BA1548-26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1548 of 2026 Arbaz Mazher Khan Age 20 years, Occu: Nil R/o House No. 10-5-46, Near Jaliwali Dargah, Kiradpura, Aurangabad ... Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through Police Inspector, MIDC CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad. … Respondent WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1713 of 2026 Shahrukh Sattar Sayyed Age 25 years, Occu: Driver R/o Plot No. 33, S. No.122, Misarwadi Aurangabad (Chhatrapati Sambhjinagar) ... Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through Police Inspector, MIDC CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad. … Respondent ..... Mr. Satej S. Jadhav and Mr. Atul P. Shejul, Advocates for the Applicant Mr. D. J. Patil, APP for the Respondent State CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. DATE: 28th September, 2026 ORDER:- 1. The present applications are for regular bail by the applicants, who are arraigned as accused in connection with Crime No. 185 of 2026 registered with MIDC, CIDCO Police Station, District Chatrapati 1 of 5 2026:BHC-AUG:44295 RB54BA1548-26 Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. The incident in question has taken place in the night of 11.04.2026 and the present applicants were also arrested on the same day. Since then, they are lingering in custody. Investigation is complete and charge-sheet has also been filed. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that the informant was asked to come at the spot of incident at 2.00 a.m. in the night by the present applicants on account of settling the past dispute among themselves. It is alleged that when the informant reached the spot, at that time, without assigning any reason, the present applicant Arbaz removed a sword from four wheeler and started assaulting him on head. It is also alleged that the applicant Shahrukh assaulted the informant on his hand and leg. When the persons in the Hotel started assembling near the spot, at that time, the applicants allegedly fled away from the spot. The informant was taken to the Hospital and thereafter, the present offence came to be registered. 3. The submissions of the learned Advocate for the applicants, at this stage, is that perusal of the injury certificate annexed by the prosecution itself refers that the injuries that have been caused to the informant are simple in nature. Investigation is complete and the custodial interrogation of the present applicant is not necessary. They, therefore, pray that on the ground that the applicants have been inside since April, 2026, they may be released on bail. 2 of 5 RB54BA1548-26 4. The learned APP, however, vehemently opposed the application by stating that, though the injuries referred to in the injury certificate of the informant are simple in nature, the intention of the applicants will have to be inferred from the fact that they came to the spot prepared and armed with swords. The moment the informant arrived there, they assaulted him with an intention to commit his murder. However, fortunately, the informant survived the injuries. The accused Arbaz has a criminal antecedent of being involved in an office under section 302 IPC while he was juvenile. The said fact has not been disclosed by the applicant Arbaz in his application and, therefore, violates the directions given by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Zeba Khan v. State of U.P. However he fairly admits that as far as the Applicant Shaharukh is concerned, there are no antecedents. 5. I have heard the learned Advocate for the applicants as well as the learned APP appearing for the State and I have also perused the entire charge-sheet. 6. On reading the statements of the eyewitnesses, there appear to be two versions. One version states that there was an incident of assault, whereas there are also witnesses who state that there was a scuffle between the two groups. One of the eyewitnesses, who claims to know the informant, states that he was present at the spot and that a quarrel took place between the applicant and the informant along with his friends, which escalated into a scuffle and thereafter into an assault. This version creates a doubt as to whether the informant was called to 3 of 5 RB54BA1548-26 the spot alone and whether he was alone when the assault took place. In any case, this is not the stage to draw any inference. 7. Taking into consideration the medical certificate, the injures which have been caused to the informant are all simple in nature, the sword has been recovered from the accused Shaharukh, investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has already been filed, there is noting for which the continuation of custody of the present applicant is necessary. Though the criminal antecedes of the applicant Arbaz is brought to the notice of this Court, appropriate procedure will be that the prosecution can bring this fact of subsequent offence to the notice of the Court before whom the said offence is being tried. However, as far as the applicants in the present case are concerned, I am inclined to allow the applications. Hence, the following order:- ORDER (i) Both the Bail Applications are allowed. (ii) The Applicants, Arbaz Mazher Khan and Shahrukh Sattar Sayyed, in connection with rime No. 185 of 2026 registered with MIDC, CIDCO Police Station, District Chatrapti Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Actbe released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/-( Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one or two sureties of the like amount. (iii)) The Applicants shall attend the concerned police station as 4 of 5 RB54BA1548-26 and when required by the Investigating Officer. (iv) The Applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner. ( HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.) JPChavan 5 of 5