933-BA-1388-26+1.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1388 OF 2026 Haribhau Bhaurao Kolpe ..APPLICANT VERSUS State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1393 OF 2026 1. Vishal Babasaheb Kolpe 2. Sagar Babasaheb Kolpe 3. Machindra Rakhma Kolpe @ Devidas Rakhma Kolpe ..APPLICANTS VERSUS State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT .... Ms. R.S. Kulkarni a/w Mr. A.R. Kachole, Advocates for applicants Ms. A.S. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for respondent - State .... CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P. for State. 2. The applicants have preferred the present applications seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No. 61 of 2026 registered with Kopergaon Gramin Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar dated 18th February, 2026 1 / 11 2026:BHC-AUG:45751 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 119(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. In all there are eights accused persons added in the said crime out of which four accused / applicants are before this Court, who came to be arrested on 10th April, 2026 (Applicants – Vishal, Sagar and Machindra @ Devidas), as far as applicant – Haribhau is concerned, he came to be arrested on 06th June, 2026. 4. At the outset, after completion of hearing this Court showed its disinclination to grant bail to Applicant – Vishal Babasaheb Kolpe, and therefore upon instructions, learned counsel for the applicants seeks permission to withdraw the application to his extent with liberty to file fresh bail application after the charges are framed by the trial Court. 5. Permission is granted. Criminal Application No. 1393 of 2026 stands dismissed as withdrawn to the extent of Applicant No.1 – Vishal Babasaheb Kolpe, with liberty to file fresh bail application after a period of one year from today or from the date of framing of charges, whichever is earlier. 6. The prosecution story in brief is that there seems to be a prior enmity between the complainant’s family and the accused persons. It is 2 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt alleged that on 17th February, 2026 when a woman relative of informant was washing clothes outside the house near the road, at that time accused – Vishal Kolpe whistled addressing to her, and therefore, there was a quarrel between Vishal and the informant’s relatives. Accused - Vishal was also slapped by Meera, who is relative of the informant and they have also proceeded to lodge a police complaint at Kopergaon. On subsequent day i.e. on 18th February, 2026 at about 09:30 in the morning it is alleged that all the eight accused persons forcibly entered into the house of the informant with iron rod and wooden stick and started assaulting the informant as well as the other family members of the informant. During the said assault, the informant alongwith other family members sustained simple as well as grievous injuries, which includes fracture and thereafter causing destruction to the other movable and immovable properties of the informant. The accused persons left the spot. The informant and the injured persons were taken to the hospital for medical treatment and accordingly injury certificates have been issued narrating the nature of injuries sustained by each of the injured. The F.I.R. came to be registered and the investigation thus proceeded and as on date the charge- sheet has been filed against present four applicants. 7. Learned A.P.P., at the outset, submits that there are in all eight accused persons, out of which accused viz. Namdeo Shivaji Kolpe and Sanjay Bapu Kolpe have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, while two other persons viz. Satish Bapu Kolpe and Babasaheb Kolpe are absconding and have 3 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt not been available for investigation. Their anticipatory bail application has been rejected and she has no instructions whether either of them have approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, the fact remains that they are unavailable for the purpose of investigation. 8. The investigation, as far as present four applicants are considered, is completed and the charge-sheet is filed in which the statement of several eye witnesses as well as the injured witnesses have been recorded. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the version given by the informant as well as of the injured witnesses do not match with each other and there are several discrepancies and omissions as far as prosecution story is considered. She submits that the allegations pertaining to each of the individual accused person should be looked from an angle of finding out whether all of them are involved in the assault to each of the injured. She submits that except accused – Vishal, the role attributed to other applicants of assault are not pertaining to the injuries of serious and grievous nature, but the injuries are simple in nature. Taking into consideration that it was a cumulative assault at the instance of all the accused persons, granting anticipatory bail to co-accused - Namdeo Shivaji Kolpe and Sanjay Bapu Kolpe becomes relevant. She argues that the role attributed to Namdeo and Sanjay is para-materia to the role attributed to the accused – Haribhau, Sagar and Machindra @ Devidas. Thus, by applying the law of parity, these 4 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt applicants, who are in custody since April 2026, deserves to be released on bail. 10. Learned A.P.P., however vehemently argued and opposed the present application. She submits that the role attributed to Namdeo and Sanjay should distinct to the present applicants. The present applicants are involved in the assault to each and every injured witness including the informant. The nature of injuries may differ but the fact remains that few of the injured witnesses were brutally attacked and assaulted, thereby causing grievous and serious injuries, such as fracture. The nature and manner in which the entire offence has taken place shows that the applicants have no fear of law. The period they have undergone is not proportionate to the offence that has been alleged against them and the role that has been attributed. Taking into consideration that two accused persons are still absconding and they are not available for investigation, release of present applicant on bail will hamper the progress of investigation. She, therefore, prays that the application be rejected. 11. I have heard the submissions of both the learned counsel and have gone through the entire charge-sheet that has been placed before me. No doubt, the manner in which the assault has been caused and the entire incident that has taken place narrates and satisfies that the applicants themselves by preparation have reached the spot of incident, entered into the 5 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt residential house of the informant and have brutally assaulted each and every family member, including the women and the house with weapons like iron rods, wooden stick and plastic stick. The injuries that have been sustained by each of the applicants corroborates the allegations that are levelled by the informant and other injures witnesses in their respective statements. Thus, there is no doubt in my mind that the alleged incident has prima facie taken place and his supported by several statements and the injured certificates. Still the fact remains that the application that is being considered is an application for grant of regular bail pending trial. Taking into consideration the individual role that has been assigned to the present applicants, following chart will assist to narrate as to each applicant is involved in the assault and causing of inflicting injuries on each of the injured witnesses :- Alleged Victim Alleged Assailant Weapon Alleged Assault on body parts Injury Certificate description Dnyaneshwar Pagar (Complainant) Namdev (ABA Granted) Devidas @ Machindra Vishal Satish (absconding) Iron Rod Stick Calf’s of both legs Back Both Hands Spine Page No.59 Abrasion – Right Leg (simple) CLW – Right Leg (simple) CLW – Left Leg (simple) Tenderness on lower back (simple) Dadasaheb Pagar (Father) Babasaheb (absconding) Vishal Sagar Satish (absconding) Haribhau Devidas @ Machindra Iron Rod, Wooden Stick Plastic Stick Ribs Left Leg Knee Left Shoulder Head above Left Eye Back Page No.58 CLW – Left frontal region (simple) Fracure on a acromial end of left clavicle (Grievous) Ranganath Pagar (Grand Father) Satish (absconding) Babasaheb (absconding) Namdev (ABA Granted) Iron Rod Head Left Hand Palm Both Knees Page No. 54 CLW – Scalp left side (simple) CLW – Left hand dorsum (simple) Fracture on a acromial end of right clavicle (Grievous) 6 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt Rajendra Pagar (Uncle) Devidas @ Machindra Sanjay (ABA Granted) Iron Rod Wooden Stick Back Both Hands Leg Page No.53 Contusions – Forearms & Legs (simple) Tenderness – Arms & Legs (simple) Fracture of left clavicle shaft (Grievous) Dislocation of left middle finger (Grievous) Shobhabai Pagar (Mother) Vishal Stick Snatched Gold Mangalsutra (5 Gm.) Leg Back Private Part Page No.56 Tenderness Contusion on Left Thigh (simple) Meera Pagar (sister-in-law) Vishal Stick Snatched Gold Chain (1 Gm.) Left Shoulder Right Hand Private Part Page No.57 Tenderness on Upper Limb Chest (simple) Vaishali Pagar (Aunt) Vishal Babasaheb (absconding) Sagar Satish (absconding) Devidas @ Machindra Iron Rod Wooden Stick Plastic Stick Left Hand Thigh Page No.55 Tenderness over Left Shoulder (simple) 12. Perusal of the aforesaid chart suggests that the present applicants have been involved in assaulting Dnayneshwar Pagar (informant), Dadasaheb Pagar (father of informant), Ranganath Pagar (grand-father of informant), Rajendra Pagar (uncle of informant), Shobhabai Pagar (mother of informant), Meera Pagar (sister-in-law of informant) and Vaishali Pagar (aunt of informant). Out of these injured witnesses, the injuries sustained by Ranganath Pagar, though grievous in nature, are not attributed to either of the applicants. Even the injuries caused to Shobhabai and Meer are not attributed to the present applicants, but the same has been attributed to the applicant (accused) – Vishal, whose application has been dismissed. Thus, the injuries which are now attributed to the present applicants pertains to the 7 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt complainant, which are simple in nature. The injuries caused to Vaishali are simple in nature. The only grievous injury that has been sustained by father of the informant – Dadasaheb is attributed to the applicants and is serious and grievous in nature. The injury is to the acromial end of left clavicle and it is fracture injury. The narration of prosecution story by the informant himself suggests that accused – Vishal was aggressor and one single injury that has been caused cannot, therefore, be attributed to all other three applicants before this Court. The exact injury which has been caused by each of the applicants will be a matter of evidence in which the prosecution will have to place material to assign the particular injury to one particular accused. At this stage, it is not possible to infer that the fracture injury is caused by either of the applicants. Similarly, the injury which has been termed as grievous and fracture injury to the left clavicle shaft and dislocation of left middle finger caused to the injured witness – Rajendra is specifically attributed to applicant – Machindra @ Devidas and co-accused – Sanjay. The co-accused – Sanjay, as mentioned above has already been released on anticipatory bail, and therefore, applicant – Machindra @ Devidas also deserves parity to this aspect. 13. Thus, taking into consideration the overall injuries that has been sustained by the injured witnesses including the informant and the nature of injuries and the role attributed to each of the present applicants, I am of the opinion that the applicants, who have been in custody since 10th April, 2026 8 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt and 06th June, 2026 are concerned and the fact that investigation pertaining to these applicants is completed and charge-sheet is filed, present applications can be allowed and the applicants can be set at liberty by granting bail with certain stringent conditions. 14. In the above circumstances, the applications stand allowed. Hence the following order :- ORDER (i) Bail Application No. 1393 of 2026 stands disposed of as withdrawn to the extent of Vishal Babasaheb Kolpe. (ii) The applicants – Haribhau Bhaurao Kolpe, Sagar Babasaheb Kolpe and Machindra @ Devidas Rakhma Kolpe shall be released on bail in Crime No. 61 of 2026 registered with Kopergaon Gramin Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar dated 18th February, 2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2),118(1),119(1),189(2),190,191(2),191(3), 324(4), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one or two solvent surety in the like amount, subject to the following conditions - a) The applicants shall attend the trial Court on every date fixed, unless their attendance is specifically exempted. b) Applicants - Haribhau Bhaurao Kolpe and Machindra @ Devidas Rakhma Kolpe shall not enter Kopergaon 9 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt Taluka, except for attending the trial and attending Kopargaon Rural Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar once in a month i.e. on first Monday of every month. c) Applicant - Sagar Babasaheb Kolpe shall attend Kopargaon Rural Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar twice in a month i.e. on first and last Monday of every month. d) The applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, contact, threaten, induce or influence the informant or any prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. e) The applicants shall furnish their current residential addresses and mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer and the trial Court within seven days of release, intimate any change forthwith, and attend the Investigating Officer upon prior written notice if further investigation is required. f) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court and, if they possess passports, shall deposit the same with the trial Court within seven days of their release. g) The applicants shall not involve themselves in any offence of a similar nature while on bail. h) Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail. 10 / 11 933-BA-1388-26+1.odt (iii) All observations in this order are prima facie and confined to the decision of this bail application. The trial Court shall decide the case on the evidence led before it. (iv) The Bail Applications are disposed of in the above terms. ( HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. ) SSD 11 / 11