-1- BA-1403-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1403 OF 2026 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3097 OF 2026 OMKAR VISHWANATH BHURE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..… Mr. Suraj R. Bagal h/f. Mr. Bharat N. Gadegaonkar, Advocate for Applicant . Mr. S. D. Ghayal, Advocate for Respondent – State. Mr. P. S. Anerao, Advocate for informant/Assist to APP (Thr. V.C.) ..... CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. DATED : 21st SEPTEMBER 2026 ORDER : 1. By present application , the applicant - Omkar Vishwanath Bhure seeks regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 23 of 2026 registered at Loha Police Station, District Nanded, for offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 309(6), 351(2) and (3), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. It is the case of the informant Sachin Khedkar, as alleged in the First Information report dated 20th January, 2026 that the applicant, who happens to be his relative, offered to supply gold worth 1 crore for 60 lakh. According to the report, the applicant ₹ ₹ 2026:BHC-AUG:43457 -2- BA-1403-2026 called him to a building which is an under construction building at Pardi on 17th January, 2026, received the cash and left on the pretext of bringing the gold. The informant subsequently stated that the proposed transaction concerned counterfeit currency, and that Co-accused Rajesh Munde, who is a police officer, and other co accused arrived at the building, assaulted and threatened the informant, and took away the cash. The additional offences were then accordingly invoked. The investigation has resulted in filing of a charge sheet. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the informant has given materially different accounts of the purpose and manner of the transaction. He points out that no part of the alleged 60 lakh has been recovered from the applicant, who has ₹ remained in custody since 29th January, 2026. He submits that the investigation is complete, the applicant has a fixed residence, and his attendance can be secured by conditions. Reliance is also placed on the interim protection granted to the co-accused Rajesh Munde. 4. The learned APP opposes bail. He submits that the applicant is alleged to have arranged the meeting and brought the informant to the place where the cash was taken. The prosecution relies on the statements of persons present, material concerning the informant’s injuries, and recorded conversations between the -3- BA-1403-2026 applicant and the informant after the incident. It also points to a pending case registered against the applicant in Telangana concerning counterfeit currency and expresses apprehension that, if released, he may influence witnesses or assist the other accused. 5. Upon hearing the respective counsels and perusing the investigation report it can be stated that the allegations are serious. Section 309(6) of BNS carries a substantial punishment, including the possibility of imprisonment for life. The Applicants submissions that the change in the version of the complainant from a proposed gold purchase transaction to a counterfeit currency transaction is material, but its effect on the credibility of the informant cannot be finally decided at the bail stage. Neither can the case be treated as a purely civil dispute nor as one without supporting material. The recorded conversations, including the alleged suggestion by the applicant about what the informant should tell the police, require examination at trial. The pending antecedent of Telangana case is also relevant to the assessment of risk, although it is still a pending trial and have not led into conviction. 6. While considering the application for bail the Court must consider the applicant’s particular role, the gravity of the accusation, his antecedents, and the risks of flight, repetition of -4- BA-1403-2026 commission of offence or interference with witnesses; it must do so without conducting a trial on the evidence. Here in the present case, the applicant has been in custody for nearly eight months and the charge sheet has been filed. The allegation that Co-accused Rajesh Munde and the persons accompanying him took the cash calls for distinct consideration of their respective roles. Nothing has been recovered from the applicant. The prosecution’s concern about witness influence is real, particularly because the applicant and informant are related, but it can presently be addressed by stringent conditions. Interim protection granted to Co accused Munde is not, by itself, a ground of parity for the applicant. 7. Having weighed these circumstances together, I am satisfied that further pretrial detention of the applicant is unnecessary, provided his liberty is curtailed by imposing stringent conditions. Hence, the following order : ORDER (i) The application is allowed. (ii) The applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No. 23 of 2026 registered at Loha Police Station, District Nanded, on furnishing a personal bond of 50,000 with one or two ₹ sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned court, subject to the following conditions: a) He shall attend every date before the trial court -5- BA-1403-2026 unless exempted by that court, and shall cooperate with any further investigation lawfully undertaken. b) He shall not contact, threaten, induce or otherwise approach the informant or any prosecution witness, directly or through another person, concerning this case. c) He shall report to Loha Police Station on the first Monday of each month between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon for three months from his release. d) He shall give the investigating officer and the trial court his current residential address and mobile number and shall promptly notify them of any change. e) He shall not leave India without the trial court’s prior permission. f) He shall not tamper with evidence or obstruct the trial. The prosecution may seek cancellation of bail if any condition is breached. g) The Trial Court shall decide the case independently of the observations in this order. (iii) In view of disposal of Bail Application, Criminal Application No. 3097 Of 2026 also stands disposed. of. (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR) JUDGE Tandale