MANOJ 503-BA-3208-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.3208 OF 2026 Mr. Aakash Raj Purohit …Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Mr. Hrishikesh Mundargi a/w Adv. Madan Gupta, Adv. Gaurang Jhaveri, Adv. K. Mishra, Adv. Harsh Nishar & Adv. Priti Jain, for the Applicant. Mr. Amit Munde, Add.PP a/w Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. DATED : 6th AUGUST, 2026 P.C. :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with Sessions Case No.256 of 2021, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, arising out of an FIR bearing CR No.113 of 2020 registered with Colaba Police Station, for the offence punishable under Sections 353, 332, 341, 143, 147, 149, 188, 269, 427 and 504 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 37/135 of the Maharashtra Police Act 1951, Sections 3 and 4 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. 3. Mr.Mundargi, learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant was granted Anticipatory Bail in the case. The Applicant used to regularly attend in the said case. On 5th August, 2026, just because the Applicant got 15 minutes late in attending the Court, a Non-Bailable Warrant was issued against him. Later, WAKLE MANOJ JANARDHAN Digitally signed by WAKLE MANOJ JANARDHAN Date: 2026.08.06 19:35:01 +0530 MANOJ 503-BA-3208-2026.DOC upon declining Applicant’s prayer for cancellation of the NBW, his bail was cancelled, he was taken into custody and even his prayer to release on bail was rejected by the trial Court. In the past, the matter before the trial Court was delayed due to non-cooperation from the Applicant. In short, the Applicant never misused the Anticipatory Bail in any manner. He submits that the Applicant undertakes to attend the trial Court regularly in the future and he will deposit the forfeited bail bond amount. 4. However, the aforesaid submissions are inconsistent with the observations of the trial Court recorded in the Order thereby refusing to release the Applicant on bail after taking him into custody. 5. Be that as it may. It is a fact that the trial is part heard. Mr. Mundargi submit that the Applicant undertakes to attend the trial Court on each date and will co-operate for expeditious disposal of the case. In view thereof, the Application deserves to be allowed but with stringent conditions. Hence, following Order:- (i) Applicant – Mr. Aakash Raj Purohit shall be released on bail in connection with in connection with Sessions Case No.256 of 2021, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, arising out of an FIR bearing CR No.113 of 2020 registered with Colaba Police Station, Mumbai, on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. (ii) The Applicant shall mark his attendance at Colaba Police Station, Mumbai, on the 1st day of each calendar month between 12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m., till the conclusion of the trial. Page 2 of 4 MANOJ 503-BA-3208-2026.DOC (iii) The Applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court unless exempted by the said Court, for the reasons to be recorded in writing. (iv) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon the prosecution witness to prevent them from deposing against him. (v) On being released from jail, the Applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigation Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. (vi) Applicant shall deposit the forfeited bail bond amount, which Mr. Mundargi stating to be Rs.15,000/-. However, if the said amount is higher that Rs.15,000/-, then the Applicant shall deposit the higher amount. (vii) The Applicant shall not indulge in identical activities for which he has been arraigned in this case. (viii) By way of abundant caution, it is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are confined for the purpose of determination to the entitlement for bail and they may not be construed as an expression of opinion on the guilt or otherwise of the Applicant and the trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove. (viii) Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 6. At this stage, as requested by the learned Counsel Mr.Mundargi, the Applicant is granted four weeks time to furnish surety. Till then, the Applicant be released on bail on his executing MANOJ 503-BA-3208-2026.DOC a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and depositing a sum of Rs.50,000/- in lieu of furnishing the surety bond. On furnishing the surety/ies within the said period, the amount of Rs.50,000/- deposited by the Applicant shall be returned. 7. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this Order. (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)