1 958BA1240.2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 958 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1240 OF 2026 Sachin Sarjerao Chavan VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra ... Miss Sakshi S. Dushing h/f Mr. Rahul R. Karpe - Advocate for Applicant Mr. V. K. Kotecha - APP for the State ... CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. DATED : 23RD SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant and the learned APP for the State. With their able assistance, I have perused the entire investigation report. 2. The present Application seeking regular bail is filed by the Applicant, who came to be arrested on 17.11.2024, in connection with Crime No. 1213 of 2024 registered with Tofkhana Police Station, Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 115(2), 324(4), 189(2), 190, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 191(2), 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 37(1), 37(3) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, and subsequently added offence under Sections 103(1), 103(2) and 118(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, pertains to the incident 2 958BA1240.2026.odt which took place on 02.11.2024 at about 08:00 p.m., while the Informant was sitting near the temple situated near Kondya Mama Chowk. It is alleged that the present Applicant, along with the other co- accused persons, who happened to be relatives of the Informant, came there on a motorcycle and took the Informant-Deceased under the pretext of accompanying them for taking money from the brother of one of the co-accused, namely, Anil Chavan. It is alleged that, as the Applicant and the co-accused were related to and known to the Informant, he accompanied them on their motorcycle. It is alleged that, suddenly, the original accused No. 3 stopped the motorcycle near one Bamboo Shop situated on the Ahilyanagar to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Road, and thereafter, all the accused persons, including the Applicant, started abusing and assaulting the Informant-Deceased. Each accused person allegedly assaulted the deceased with different kinds of weapons. As far as the present Applicant is concerned, it is alleged that he assaulted the Informant-Deceased by picking up a stone lying on the roadside and inflicted serious blows on the head and back of the Informant-Deceased, thereby causing injuries. The Informant-Deceased was thereafter taken to the hospital and admitted for treatment. As he was conscious, his statement came to be recorded by the Police, and the said statement was treated as the First Information Report. 4. The record further indicates that, while taking treatment in the hospital, the Informant succumbed to the injuries. Post-mortem was 3 958BA1240.2026.odt conducted, and the report mentions the cause of death as “Septicemia in a case of facial bone fractures”. It also makes reference to the cause of death as “Infection of the blood by poisonous bacteria”. The incident took place on 02.11.2024. The Informant-Deceased was taking treatment in the hospital till 13.11.2024 and, in the hospital itself, he succumbed to the injuries. The offence was converted into an offence under Section 103 of the BNS, and the Applicant came to be arrested on 17.11.2024. 5. Before proceeding to appreciate the role of the present Applicant, it is necessary to mention that, in all, there are five accused persons, including the Applicant, out of whom three accused persons have been released on bail. 6. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been in custody since 17.11.2024 and, till date, the trial has not commenced. She further argues that the other three accused persons have been released on bail and that the role attributed to the present Applicant is on par with that attributed to the co-accused who have been released on bail. She thus claims parity and prays for the release of the present Applicant. 7. In addition to the aforesaid submissions, the learned Advocate for the Applicant also argues that the role attributed to the present Applicant is to have assaulted the Informant-Deceased with the 4 958BA1240.2026.odt aid of a stone lying on the road. The alleged assault was caused on the head and back of the Informant-Deceased. The cause of death clearly specifies that the death is not due to the injuries but is due to ‘Septicemia in a case of facial bone fractures’ and due to ‘Infection of the blood by poisonous bacteria’. There seems to be a case of medical negligence or medical complications, however, according to her, the injuries inflicted due to the assault by the present Applicant are not responsible for the death of the deceased. She relies upon the order passed by this Court in the case of the co-accused, namely, Pravin Subhash Pawar, wherein the Court had taken into consideration the specific role attributed to the said accused and had thereafter observed that the death was not due to the injury caused by the said accused and, therefore, had released him on bail. She further submits that the post- mortem report does not indicate that any serious injuries were caused to the head or back of the deceased. She, therefore, submits that the present Applicant, who has been in custody since 17.11.2024, deserves to be released on bail. 8. The learned APP vehemently opposes the said Application. He argues that the offence is serious and that the present Applicant has played an active role in the entire offence right from its initiation. He submits that the present Applicant has involved himself in misleading the Informant-Deceased to accompany them and, after taking him to a lonely place, all the accused persons assaulted him. He further argues 5 958BA1240.2026.odt that the specific role of assault with the aid of a stone has been assigned to the present Applicant and that grievous and serious injuries were caused due to the assault inflicted by the present Applicant. He, thus, argues that the present Applicant does not deserve to be released on bail and that the Application be rejected. 9. The learned APP further argues that the Injury Certificate, which was issued first in time, notes that there is a fracture to the scalp of the deceased. He further submits that the order granting bail to the co-accused, Pravin Subhash Pawar, categorically makes a reference to the role played by the present Applicant by holding that the assault was caused on a vital part by the present Applicant with the aid of a stone. He thus submits that this is not a case of parity. In view of the material available on record and the direct involvement and role attributed to the present Applicant, the bail application be rejected. 10. I have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned Advocate for the Applicant and the learned APP for the State and have also perused the documents placed on record by way of the charge- sheet, as well as the orders passed granting bail to the other co-accused persons. No doubt, the offence alleged against the present Applicant is serious, and the First Information Report clearly mentions the role attributed to the present Applicant. The present Applicant has been shown to be involved not only in accompanying the assailants but has 6 958BA1240.2026.odt also actively played a role in inflicting injuries on the head and back of the deceased Informant with the help of a stone lying on the roadside. Taking into consideration the role assigned to the present Applicant, the documents placed on record by the Investigating Officer need to be scrutinized. The important piece of evidence found in the charge-sheet is the post-mortem report, which clearly indicates that the cause of death is due to “Septicemia in a case of facial bone fractures” and “Infection of the blood by poisonous bacteria.” 11. Taking into consideration the individual role attributed to each of the accused, the allegation of assault on the facial bone or face of the Informant is against one Sachin Pawar, who is in custody. It is also necessary to observe that Column No. 17, which makes reference to surface wounds and injuries, clearly mentions that the injuries caused on the head are healed. In Column No. 19, pertaining to the internal examination of the head, there are no injuries to the head of the deceased. Having regard to the role that has been assigned to the present Applicant, the post mortem report, and the fact that there has been no recovery of the stone by the Investigating Agency, at this stage, prima facie, I am inclined to enlarge the present Applicant on bail for the aforesaid reasons, coupled with the fact that the Applicant has been in custody since 17.11.2024 and there has been no progress towards the commencement of the trial till date. 7 958BA1240.2026.odt 12. As far as the trial is concerned, the learned APP submits that the charge has been framed and summons has been issued to one witness. Be that as it may, the trial has not proceeded till date and, therefore, further custodial interrogation or further custody of the Applicant is unwarranted. Hence, I pass the following order: ORDER [i] The Bail Application No. 1240 of 2026 is allowed. [ii] The Applicant, Sachin Sarjerao Chavan, be released on regular bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount, in connection with Crime No.1213/2024 registered with Tofkhana Police Station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 115(2), 324(4), 189(2), 190, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 191(2) and 191(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 37(1), 37(3) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 and subsequently added sections 103(1), 103(2) and 118(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the following conditions : (a) The Applicant is directed to attend the concerned police station and report to the concerned Police Station Tofkhana, Ahiyanagar on every Monday between 12:00 hrs and 14:00 hrs., till framing of charge. 8 958BA1240.2026.odt (b) The Applicant shall reside outside Ahilyanagar District till the framing of charge, except for the purpose of attending the concerned Police Station on every Monday between 12:00 hrs. and 14:00 hrs., as directed under condition (a) above, and the date of the Trial Court as directed under condition (c) below. (c) The Applicant shall attend each and every date of the Trial Court without fail unless exempted by the Trial Court on emergent consideration. (d) The Applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner. (e) The Applicant shall submit their Aadhar and Pan Card to the Investigating Officer and detailed addresses and phone numbers of applicants and two of the near relatives. (f) Single violation of the above conditions on the part of the applicant would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail. [iii] Bail Application stands disposed of. [ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ] JUDGE SG Punde Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 29/09/2026 12:56:04