31.BA.3323.2026.doc HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.) 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.3323 OF 2026 Ishan Raosaheb Borude .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Vipul Dushing a/w. Mr. Prajyot Shinde, Mr. Ashraf Kazi, Advocates for Applicant.  Mr. Sukanta A. Karmakar, APP for Respondent.  API – Madhumati Shinde, Pimpri Police Station. ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 02, 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Dushing, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Karmakar, learned APP for Respondent. 2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.739 of 2025 registered with Pimpri Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 103, 109(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Section 4(25)(27) of the Arms Act, 1959 and Sections 3 and 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and Section 37(1)(3) read with Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. 3. On 31.08.2026, after hearing the learned Advocate and learned APP following order was passed:- “1. Heard Mr. Dushing, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Karmakar, learned APP for Respondent – State. 1 of 6 31.BA.3323.2026.doc 2. In the present case, Applicant is arraigned as accused alongwith 4 accused persons in the crime. Applicant is indicted under Sections 103, 109(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS); Section 4(25)(27) of the Arms Act; Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 37(1)(3) read with 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. 3. According to the prosecution case, as argued by Mr. Dushing, the prosecution has attributed a specific role to the other co- accused persons namely that they had arrived at the scene of the crime and allegedly assaulted the victim. The prosecution has recorded statements of three primary eyewitnesses who claim to have witnessed the incident, copies of which are appended to the Application. 4. According to the prosecution case and as can be seen from one of the witness statements appended at Page No.89, the witness states that the Applicant was part of the conspiracy to eliminate the victim. Save and except for the said statement appearing on Page No.89, there is nothing else attributed to the role of the Applicant. Applicant was not named in the initial FIR, but was arraigned as an accused only on the basis of the said witness statement. Prima facie, the Applicant has no antecedents. He is 19 years old, a young offender and is studying at an ITI. 5. Prima facie, on the basis of the aforesaid submissions, an arguable case is made out by Mr. Dushing for grant of bail. 6. Mr. Karmakar, learned Prosecutor would persuade me to allow him to take appropriate instructions with regard to the specific role attributed to the accused and as to whether he was present at the scene of crime because it appears from the record that the Applicant was keeping a watch and had indicated about the presence of the deceased via a phone signal and he would therefore like to take appropriate instructions in that regard 7. At the request made by the learned Prosecutor, the matter to be listed as a ‘Part-Heard’ on the next adjourned date. 8. Stand over to 2nd September 2026. To be treated as ‘First on Board’.” 4. Carrying on further, it is prima facie seen that in so far Applicant is concerned, save and except witness statement that Applicant was a part of the conspiracy there is no specific role attributed to the Applicant, in so far as the crime in question is concerned. 5. Applicant having no antecedents and being a 19 year old 2 of 6 31.BA.3323.2026.doc young offender and studying in ITI deserves to be given an opportunity. 6. Considering Applicant’s age, if he is enlarged on bail Court is hopeful that his family will undoubtedly do their duty to make every effort and attempt to reform and aid the Applicant in leading a reformed life while on bail rather than keep him in prison and expose him to criminal outlook and life in prison. However on the flip side, if a chance is given to the Applicant because of his young age by enlarging him on bail, there is a possibility that he will be remorseful and repent in retrospect. This is a chance required to be taken by the Court because punishment has to be believed to be inflicted for a reformative result rather than being punitive in nature. 7. Undoubtedly the trial will determine the complicity of Applicant in the offence. While considering Bail Application in such facts, Court feels that reform and rehabilitation of the under trial accused needs to be considered especially when age of the accused person is young so that he gets an opportunity / or is given an opportunity to reform, rehabilitate and earn his livelihood honorably from the perspective of social integration. This is a chance which the Court must take considering the young age of accused person. The age of the Applicant is very young. If the Applicant is incarcerated in prison further, there is every possibility that he might lose faith in the 3 of 6 31.BA.3323.2026.doc institution and society at large and may tread the path of criminality or would waste his life. Incarceration in prison exposes many youth to abuse as is shown statistically. 8. There are several harms of incarceration which are inflicted disproportionately on the youth. This is the reason why Court feels that any / every semblance of a chance towards a reformative approach in punishment should be adopted, especially in the case of young offenders. Hence every opportunity or to that extent risk should be constructively taken by the Court in the case of young offenders – accused before committing such accused to further custody and give such accused an opportunity to become a good citizen in the Society. These observations are only in the view of the young age of the Applicant before me and it is only a means to explore an alternative to incarceration so that the Applicant can become a good citizen. 9. 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. 739 of 2025; (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand only) with one or two surety / sureties of the like amount; 4 of 6 31.BA.3323.2026.doc (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at the concerned Police Station, 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 without prior permission of the Trial Court; (vi) Applicant shall not influence 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. 10. 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 5 of 6 31.BA.3323.2026.doc uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made hereinabove in this order. 11. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 6 of 6 HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Digitally signed by HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Date: 2026.09.02 18:42:27 +0530