Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9989 (BOM)

AKSHAY PUNDALIK KHANDBHOR v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

BA/2067/2026 · 2026-09-22

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

77.BA.2067.2026.doc Ajay 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. 2067 OF 2026 Akshay Pundalik Khandbhor .. Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Aniket Nikam a/w. Ms. Abhilasha Pawar, Advocates for Applicant.  Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for Respondent – State. ......…........... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 22, 2026. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Nikam, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Talhar, learned APP for Respondent – State. 2. This is an Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking bail in connection with C.R.No.270 of 2024 registered with Vadgaon Maval Police Station, District Pune for offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 324, 504, 506, 34, 143, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4(25) and 4(27) of the Arms Act. The First Information Report is filed on 06.06.2024 and Applicant came to be arrested on 04.03.2025. 1 of 4 77.BA.2067.2026.doc 3. Applicant has been a part of an unlawful assembly on the date of the incident on 05.06.2024. Though he has been arrested on 04.03.2025, since he was absconding, the mere fact of absconding cannot be held against the accused for considering his case for grant of bail. On merits, it is prima facie seen that the actual incident in question was preceded by two earlier incidents wherein the assault took place. 4. Precise role attributed to Applicant before me is that he had used a stick for committing the assault. Applicant's name is not mentioned in the first FIR either. That reference is through the unknown person named therein. However, in that case then, TIP has been conducted, but Applicant has not been identified. Similarly placed co-accused Nos.5 and 6 have been enlarged on bail. Applicant is incarcerated for the past more than 1 year 7 months pending trial. Trial has not commenced. I am therefore inclined to accept the submissions advanced by Advocate Mr. Nikam and consider the Application for bail on parity. 5. Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and findings, Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) Applicant – Akshay Pundalik Khandbhor is directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with 2 of 4 77.BA.2067.2026.doc CR. No.270 of 2024; (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 or two sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at Vadgaon Maval Police Station, once every month, on the first Sunday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. until commencement of trial and thereafter shall attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court; (iv) Applicant shall cooperate with the conduct of the trial and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted. Applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail; (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 residential address and mobile telephone 3 of 4 77.BA.2067.2026.doc number and shall forthwith inform the Investigating Officer of any change in his residential address or mobile telephone number, as and when such change occurs; and (viii)Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to the Applicant. 6. 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. 7. Bail Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Ajay 4 of 4 AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Digitally signed by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.09.22 20:25:50 +0530