Order 210826ba1000.26 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [BA] NO. 1000 OF 2026. 1.Chaitanya Pandurang Invate. 2.Tarun Vinod Bamnere -VERSUS- State of Maharashtra. Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Shri R.K. Tiwari, Advocate for Applicants. Shri N.B. Jawade, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : AUGUST 21, 2026. Heard. 2. Applicants came to be arrested in connection with Crime No.35/2026 registered with Gittikhadan Police Station, Nagpur City for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 115[2], 118[1], 296, 351[3], 189, 191[2], 191[3] and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). Charge sheet is filed and Sections 3[1][ii], 3[2], 3[4] of the Maharashtra Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) were added. Rgd. 2026:BHC-NAG:11060 Order 210826ba1000.26 2 3. The first information report is lodged by Vitthal Adane, alleging that on 14.01.2026 some one has lodged a complaint in respect of their election booth with the police station, and when he went there, he was abused by Ganesh who asked him to remove the booth. On 15.01.2026, when the complainant was at Ashok Samrat Chowk, the accused persons came there in mob with weapons in their hand and there was a quarrel, in which the informant was assaulted, he suffered fracture to his hand and therefore, the report. 4. The learned Counsel for applicants submit that though the provisions of MCOC Act are invoked against the applicant, however, so far as the offence against the applicants are under Sections 109, 115[2], 118[1], 296, 351[3], 189, 191[2], 191[3] and 190 of the BNS. He submits that a quarrel took place between both the parties on the ground of setting up election booth. It is further submitted that in the first information report, name of applicants are not stated, however, it is stated that 90 to 100 persons gathered at the spot, wherein they were having iron fighter, gupti, knife, sticks etc. in their hands, and they assaulted three persons. It is Rgd. Order 210826ba1000.26 3 further submitted that the applicant was arrested, test identification parade was carried out wherein applicants were identified by the witnesses. He further submits that however, thereafter no statement was recorded leveling specific role to applicants, in such circumstances, there is no material in the entire charge sheet to connect applicants with the alleged crime to attempt to murder. He further submits that merely invocation of MCOC Act, will not suffice the purpose and even the offences which are shown against applicants are registered under Gambling Act. In such circumstances, he submits that sanction ought not to have been given to invoke the MCOC Act, and therefore, applicants be released on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the application and submits that applicants were identified in the test identification parade. He further submits that injuries on the injured persons are serious in nature. CDR report shows presence of applicants on the spot, and in such circumstances, it cannot be said that applicants are not involved in the crime. Rgd. Order 210826ba1000.26 4 6. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and gone through the material on record. Admittedly previously cases were registered under Maharashtra Gambling Act. It further appears that in the entire charge sheet, except for identification parade, there is no incriminating material against applicants. Even if it is presumed that applicants were present on the spot, however, thereafter, after test identification parade, no statement of witnesses are recorded showing specific role of applicants. In absence of material against applicants, I am of the considered opinion that applicants have made out a case for grant of bail. It is to be noted that though offence under MCOC Act are registered, that by itself will not preclude from granting regular bail. Hence, the following order. ORDER (i) Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of. (ii) Applicants /accused [1] Chaitanya Pandurang Invate and [2]Tarun Vinod Bamnere be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No.35/2026 registered with Gittikhadan Rgd. Order 210826ba1000.26 5 Police Station, Nagpur City for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 115[2], 118[1], 296, 351[3], 189, 191[2], 191[3] and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 3[1][ii], 3[2], 3[4] of the Maharashtra Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) on their furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount. (iii) The accused shall not enter within the territorial jurisdiction where the informant is residing, till the completion of the trial. (iv) 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. (v) The accused shall provide their residential address and cell number to Police Station concerned and shall not change their place of residence without prior intimation to the Investigating Agency. (vi) The accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If they fail to attend the trial for one single date, or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, their default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail. (vii) The above observations are prima facie in nature, and restricted for the purpose of deciding this application. The Trial Court shall not get itself influenced by said observations, Rgd. Order 210826ba1000.26 6 during the course of trial. (viii) Misc. Applications, if any, are also disposed of. JUDGE Rgd. Signed by: R.G. Dhuriya (RGD) Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 25/08/2026 11:42:52