1 40 BA 1308.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 1308/2026 (Shrikant S/o Ramesh Kirpane Vs. State of Maharashtra) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. K. A. Kothari, Advocate for applicant. Ms. T.H. Udeshi, APP for Non-applicant/State. CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J . DATED : 15/10/2026. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No.324/2026 registered with Police Station Lakhani, Dist. Bhandara for the offences punishable under Sections 5, 5A, 5B, 9A of Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976, Sections 11(1)(a), 11(1)(d), 11(1) (c), 11(1)(j) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Section 119 of the Maharashtra Police Act, Sections 325, 49 the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (“MCOCA”). 3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is alleged that the applicant was escorting the main vehicle carrying cattle in a Baleno Car bearing registration 2 40 BA 1308.26 No. MH-36-AR-7164. However apart from that there are no allegations against the applicant that the cattle belonged to the applicant which were being transported in a cruel manner. The person who was sitting along with the applicant in the said car namely Ayush, has already been released by this Court on bail. So far as the invocation of the MCOCA is concerned, though there is one earlier offence registered against the applicant for committing similar type of offence, however not a single crime is registered along with the main accused Samrat. Therefore, the applicant cannot be said to be involved in the organized crime and he is not a member of the syndicate. Under such circumstances, he submits that the applicant deserves to be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned APP opposes the application and submits that the applicant was in the pilot car i.e. Balenor car accompanying the main vehicle carrying the cattle. Further, said Baleno car belonged to the applicant. There are also material on record like Call Detail sReport (“CDR”) and the transactions between the applicant and one Shubham Bhure which is sufficient to connect the applicant with the alleged crime. The 3 40 BA 1308.26 applicant has one another similar crime registered against him and has become habitual in committing similar type of offences and therefore MCOCA was invoked against the applicant. She further submits that statement recorded under Section 18 of the MCOCA of Harshal discloses that the applicant is involved in the crime, hence the applicant does not deserve to be granted bail. 5. Upon consideration of the submission of both the sides, it appears that the role of the applicant attributed in the crime is that he was in the pilot car accompanying the main vehicle, which was carrying the cattle. No doubt, the Baleno Car belong to the applicant and the applicant was present in the said car. However, only from the statements recorded under section 18 of MCOCA of the accused persons, it cannot be inferred that even the applicant is smuggling cattle for slaughter. So far as the CDR and the transactions between the applicant and Shubham Bhure are concerned, the same can be considered at the stage of trial. Considering the nature of allegations and that there are no past crimes committed along with the main accused Samrat Yawale, I am of the considered opinion that it is very difficult to say that the 4 40 BA 1308.26 applicant is a member of the said syndicate and involved in the organized crime. Mere invocation of MCOCA would not be sufficient to keep the applicant behind bars. Therefore, as there are limited allegation against the applicant of being present in the pilot car accompanying the main car, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant, hence the following order:- ORDER (i) Criminal application is allowed and disposed of. (ii) The applicant/accused Shrikant S/o Ramesh Kirpane be released on bail in connection with Crime No.324/2026 registered with Police Station Lakhani, Dist. Bhandara for the offences punishable under Sections 5, 5A, 5B, 9A of Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976, Sections 11(1) (a), 11(1)(d), 11(1)(c), 11(1)(j) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Section 119 of the Maharashtra Police Act, Sections 325, 49 the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the MCOCA on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount. (iii) The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence. (iv) The accused shall provide his residential address and cell number to concerned Police Station and shall not 5 40 BA 1308.26 change his place of residence without prior intimation to the concerned Investigating Officer. (v) Applicant shall not commit similar type of offence in future. (vi) The applicant/accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial on even a single date or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail. 6. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. 7. The observation of this Court are prima facie in nature and are only limited to this application. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by the aforesaid observations. ( M. M. NERLIKAR , J.) Gohane Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 15/10/2026 18:13:33