Bail968ba1680-26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 968 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1680 OF 2026 Sachin Dilip Ghorpade VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra ... Mr. Jadhav Satej S, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. D. J. Patil, APP for the Respondent-State CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. Dated : 27th August, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned Advocate for applicant and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent – State. 2. The present application for regular bail is filed by the applicant, who is arraigned as accused in FIR bearing Crime No. 0289 of 2026, dated 20th July, 2026, registered with Waluj Police Station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (City), for offences punishable under Sections 122 and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, and Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. 3. The learned Advocate for the applicant submits that this court, on 20.08.2026, after considering the entire merits, has enlarged the co- accused Shaharukh Sandu Sayyad on bail in Bail Application No. 1693 of 2026. He refers to para 4 of the said order to point out that this Court has, in the said application, considered the role of the present 1 of 4 2026:BHC-AUG:38728 Bail968ba1680-26 applicant and observed that the disclosure of accused Sharukh mentions that the present applicant is owner of the said pistol and the present applicant had supplied the said pistol to the released accused Shaharukh Sandu Sayyad. He further submitted that the recovery of the pistol was made from Shaharukh Sandu Sayyad and thereafter the offence was registered. He submits that apart from the statement in the nature of disclosure of co-accused, there is nothing on record to show that the recovered pistol was owned by the present applicant or was ever supplied to the co-accused Shaharukh. He submits that he presses the present applicant on the ground of parity stating that the role assigned to the present applicant and the material against the present applicant is of much inferior quality as compared to the released accused Shaharukh. He, thus, prays that the bail be granted. 4. The learned APP opposes the application by stating that the material discloses that the applicant is owner of the said pistol. However, the learned APP is not in a position to dispute the fact that the alleged pistol was recovered from the possession of Shaharukh and offence is therefore registered. In this event of the matter, the law of parity clearly applies to the present applicant. The present application deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following order: ORDER (i) The Bail Application No. 1680 of 2026 is allowed. 2 of 4 Bail968ba1680-26 (ii) The applicant - Sachin Dilip Ghorpade shall be released on bail in Crime No. 0289 of 2026 registered with Waluj Police Station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (City), for offences punishable under Sections 122 and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, and Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount, subject to the following conditions :- (a) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall co- operate in the investigation. The applicant shall attend the trial Court on every date fixed, unless his attendance is specifically exempted. (b) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, contact, threaten, induce or influence the informant or any prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (c) The applicant shall furnish his 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. (d) The applicant 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. 3 of 4 Bail968ba1680-26 (e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature while on bail. (f) Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail. (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 independently on the evidence led before it. (iv) The Bail Application is disposed of in the above terms. (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.) JPChavan 4 of 4