35-BA-1765-26.doc rsk IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1765 OF 2026 Ankush Jaywant Satkar .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Niranjan Bhavake a/w. Mudra Bhayje a/w. Ms. Vaishnavi Chore, Ms. Drishti Madhani and Mr. Aurag Ramkar i/b. Bhavake and Associate for Applicant.  Mrs. Rajeshree V. Newton, APP for the Respondent-State. ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : AUGUST 31, 2026 P.C. : 1. Mr. Niranjan Bhavake, learned counsel for Applicant and Mrs. Rajeshree V. Newton, learned APP for the Respondent-State. 2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.125 of 2025 registered with Wadgaon Maval Police Station, Pune for offences punishable under Sections103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 4(25) of the Arms Act, 1959. Date of the incident is 1 April 2025. 3. Applicant is indicted in crime No.125 of 2025 registered with Wadgaon Maval PoliceStation, Pune, Maharashtra under Sections 103(1), 3 (5) of BNS Act and Section 4(25) of the Arms Act. Weapon 1 of 5 35-BA-1765-26.doc in question is sickle (kyota). The applicant and the deceased victim’s family are all relatives of each other . Though the incident has occurred on 1 April 2025, the reason for that incident is a fight between the parties in the year 2018 but that is not simply so. The said dispute revived in March 2025 leading to the present incident in question. It is prima facie seen that the applicant along with his wife , daughter, father-in-law, mother-in-law and other relatives were working in the field sometime in March 2025. In view of incident of 2018 the deceased victim had started sending abusive video messages on Whatsapp to the wife of the applicant who is arraigned as accused No.1 at that time. The mother in law of the applicant and minor daughter of the applicant on receiving such messages complained to Applicant and he not knowing from which mobile phones the messages were sent enquired upon which it was revealed that said messages were sent by none other than the deceased victim to them. The incident of 2018 pertains to a threat given by the deceased victim to the applicant and his family members in view of certain previous relationship between the victim’s wife and present applicant(accused No.1). In the statement of the wife of the victim, which is appended at page 88 she has referred to the incident of 2018. However the statement of wife of the applicant which has been recorded and appended at page 85 gives further details leading to the incident in question. According to this statement, the deceased victim was 2 of 5 35-BA-1765-26.doc repeatedly sending abusive and filthy video messages on Whatsapp to the wife of the applicant and later on he started sending those messages to the minor daughter and mother-in-law of the applicant also. Once this happened there could have been some reason for the applicant which triggered the incident in question. Insofar as the incident is concerned , there is no direct eye witness to the incident save and except the witness statement of a neighbour which categorically states that it was the accused No. 2 who was instrumental in inflicting the blow with the weapon i.e. koyta on the head of the victim. The said neighbour has further stated that after the blow was inflicted by accused No.2 on the victim, she hid herself inside her room. Regarding precise role of accused No.1 is concerned, she has stated that she heard the quarrel with the victim as there was some scuffle going on between them. Insofar as the statement of Sangeeta, who is mother of the victim is concerned the same is however a complete improvisation, however it does not refer to the three accused persons seen running away from the incident site. She has however specifically referred to only one person having been seen running from the incident site. No test identification parade has been either carried out for identification of the person who was seen running by the mother of the victim. The applicant has been incarcerated for 16 months. Accused No.2 has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the Court. Since the case of the prosecution is based on 3 of 5 35-BA-1765-26.doc circumstantial evidence and the motive of the crime will probably prove the complicity of the applicant at the time of trial. Insofar as prima facie material for grant of bail is concerned, applicant has made out a case for grant of bail. 4. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant has made out case for grant of bail subject to following conditions:- I) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with Crime No.125 of 2025 registered with Wadgaon Maval Police Station, Pune; ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount; iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at once every month on the first Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.; iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted and will not take any unnecessary adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the prosecution to apply for revocation of this order; v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra 4 of 5 35-BA-1765-26.doc without prior permission of the Trial Court; vi) Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner; vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of his current address and mobile contact number and / or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time, as applicable; and viii) Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail granted to the Applicant. 5. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are limited for the purpose of granting Bail only and I have not made any observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made hereinabove in this order. 6. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. rsk [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 5 of 5