All Bail Application

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.966 OF 2013 MR.SHABBU RAUF KHAN )...APPLICANT V/s. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. )...RESPONDENTS Mr.Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Mr.Subhash Hulyalkar Advocate for Applicant. Mrs.S.V.Sonawane APP for the State. CORAM: ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATE : rd JULY, 2013. 3 P.C. : 1 Heard. 2 Since the period of three moths stipulated by the order dated 12.4.2013 is not over, the application is premature, so to say. 3 However, in the circumstances explained by the learned counsel for the applicant, instead of rejecting the application on that ground, it would be proper to consider it after 12.7.2013. 4 Stand over to 16.7.2013. (ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.) avk 1/1

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.966 OF 2013 SHABBU RAUF KHAN )...APPLICANT V/s. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. )...RESPONDENTS Mr.Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Mr.Subhash Hulyalkar Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.G.P.Mulekar APP for the State. CORAM: ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J. DATE : 16th JULY, 2013. P.C. : 1 Heard Mr.Satyavrat Joshi, the learned counsel for the applicant, and Mrs.G.P.Mulekar, the learned APP for the State. 2 The previous application filed by the applicant was withdrawn by him, after submitting that the applicant be granted liberty to apply afresh for bail, should the trial not commence within a reasonable time. Liberty was granted by the court to the applicant to apply afresh for bail, in the event of the trial not commencing within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the said order by the court. The order was passed on 12.4.2013. 3 I am informed that, though the said period is over, the trial has not yet commenced. The learned counsel for the applicant has produced a copy of the roznama of the trial court, which indicates that the trial has not yet commenced, and that, even a Charge has not yet been framed. 4 I have, therefore, considered the facts of the case, afresh. It is clear that though the participation of the applicant in the alleged incident, is indicated by the material in the chargesheet, the role attributed to the applicant is not as grave, as has been attributed to, two other accused. The applicant is alleged to have given a blow to the deceased by a pana on the wrist of the deceased. 5 The applicant is of 19 years. There are no antecedents. The applicant is in custody for a period of more than nine months. 6 Under these circumstances, I am inclined to grant one opportunity to the applicant of availing of liberty, subject to certain conditions. 7 The application is allowed. 8 The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/, with one surety in the like amount, or two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/ each, on the following conditions : i) The applicant shall not contact, meet or approach any of the prosecution witnesses, in any manner, whatsoever. ii) The applicant shall report to the Pimpri Police Station every Sunday, between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m., till the disposal of the case against him. (ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1031 OF 2020 … Chinmay Prashant Jagtap .. Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent None for the applicant. Smt. M.M.Deshmukh, APP for the State. CORAM: SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 10TH DECEMBER, 2020 P.C:- Re-notify after Christmas Vacation. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J Wakodikar

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1031 OF 2020 ..... Chinmay Prashant Jagtap ... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents ….... Mr. Prashant Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. Smt. J. S. Lohokare, APP for State-Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 05th FEBRUARY, 2021 P.C. : . At the request of learned APP, stand over to 16th March (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1031 OF 2020 Chinmay Prashant Jagtap .... Applicant versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents ….... Mr.Pravin Mengane h/f Prashant P. Patil, Advocate for Applicant. Mr.S.H. Yadav, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 16th MARCH, 2021 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant, stand over to 27/04/2021. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1031 OF 2020 Chinmay Prashant Jagtap APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Pravin P. Mengane i/b Prashant P Patil for applicant. P.N.Dabholkar APP for Respondent/state. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIRENDRASINGH GYANSINGH BISHT J DATE : 22nd November, 2021 P.C. : S. O. to 06/12/2021 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1031 OF 2020 Chinmay Prashant Jagtap APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr. Sandeep Shinde a/w Mr. Pravin Mengane i/b Prashant P Patil for Applicant Ms. P.N.Dabholkar APP for Respondent State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIRENDRASINGH GYANSINGH BISHT J DATE : 6th December, 2021 P.C. : Arguments are concluded. Judgment/ order is reserved. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1031 OF 2020 Chinmay Prashant Jagtap … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents Mr. Sandeep D. Shinde a/w Mr. Pravin Mengane i/b Mr. Prashant Patil, for the Applicant. Ms. P. N.Dabholkar, APP, for the State-Respondent. CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J. RESERVED ON : 6th December, 2021. PRONOUNCED ON : 15th December, 2021. PC:- . The present application has been moved by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in C.R. No. 476 of 2017 registered with Karad Taluka Police Station, District-Satara for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 It is the case of prosecution that informant is uncle of deceased Prathamesh Sanjay Sankpal, who was a student of 12th standard Rekha Patil 1/5 studying in Y.C.College of Science at Vidyanagar, Karad. The applicant and two more students, who are stated to be juveniles in conflict with law, were also studying in the same college. On 17/11/2017 the deceased left his house for college as there was examination but did not return. 3 The prosecution alleges that the relations between the deceased and the applicants and other co-accused were not cordial and therefore, on 17/11/2017 at about 4-00 p.m. they committed murder of the deceased in the area known as 'Bhatki Shiva' near railway line in the vicinity of village Parle, Taluka Karad by means of knife and scythe. Accordingly FIR came to be lodged. 4 Mr. Shinde, learned Counsel for the applicant, submits that there was college rivalry between the deceased and the applicant and another. Although it is alleged that the deceased was assaulted by means of a knife on head, face and neck but those injuries did not match with the findings of Postmortem Report. Although the charge-sheet has been filed but trial is yet to be commenced. Having regard to the circumstance and as also age of the applicant, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. Rekha Patil 2/5 5 Ms. Dabholkar, learned APP, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the submissions by contending that there is statement of eye witness, namely, Yogesh Tanaji Shedge who had witnessed the incident and even the deceased himself had confided to Vishwajit @ Vishu Krushnarao Pawar on 17/11/2017 that he is likely to be beaten. Besides, the Postmortem Report also point out the injuries sustained by the deceased which is quite in consonance with the theory of prosecution. There is no inconsistency between findings of Postmortem Report and theory of prosecution as is claimed by learned counsel for the applicant. According to learned APP, since the deceased was mercilessly killed the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 6 Perused investigation papers. First of all, I may from the FIR point out that the informant has clearly stated that there were injury marks on the head and neck of the deceased by means of a sharp weapon. Column No. 17 of the Postmortem Report clearly shows that there were multiple superficial to deep incised wounds over scalp, face and neck. Thus apparently there is no inconsistency, except wound on face, between the case of prosecution and finding of the Postmortem Report as canvased before me by learned Counsel for the applicant. 7 This brings me to the statements of eye witness viz. Kiran @ Ganesh Shivaji Thorat. From the statement of this witness it is very much clear that he witnessed the whole incident. According to this witness, the hands of deceased was caught hold of by accused Vijay while the applicant took out a scythe from his sack which was given to him by accused Vijay only and then gave a blow on the head of the deceased as a result of which deceased fell down. Even thereafter the applicant gave three blows of scythe on the neck of the deceased. After the deceased died, the applicant threatened the others including the witnesses that if any of them disclosed the incident they would be similarly done to death. His statement further shows that because of threats given by the applicant and as he is of hot temperament, this witness did not tell about the incident to anybody. Incidentally, I may note from the Postmortem Report that the cause of death was " Head injury due to multiple incised wounds associated with fracture skull bone". 8 One more statement is that of Vishwajit @ Vishu Krushnarao Pawar. It appears that on 17/11/2017 when witness had been to college for examination, deceased called him and expressed his apprehension that he would be beaten by the boys. When this witness Rekha Patil 4/5 enquired with him as to who were those boys, the deceased replied that he would tell later on. At about 3-30 p.m. this witness saw applicant and other accused and as also the deceased standing in front of them. 9 From the above, it is clear that the witness, namely, Vishwajit @ Vishu Krushnarao Pawar had seen the applicant and other accused in the company of the deceased immediately before the incident. It is also pertinent to note that the deceased had expressed his apprehension of his being beaten at the hands of boys though he did not name those boys. However, immediately thereafter incident took place and it appears that those boys were applicant and others which is more than clear from the statement of Kiran @ Ganesh Shivaji Thorat. 10 From the above, I find that there is overwhelming evidence. The injured was brutally killed by the applicant by means of scythe. I do not find merit in the application. Hence, the following order. ORDER Bail Application No. 1031 of 2020 is rejected. REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Digitally signed by REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2021.12.15 12:42:49 +0530 Rekha Patil 5/5 (V. G. BISHT, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 3rd June, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. stand over to 26/06/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent ….... Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for Applicant. Ms.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 14th JUNE, 2019 P.C. : Learned APP seeks time to take instructions regarding health condition of the Applicant. Time as prayed for is granted. Stand over to 28/06/2019. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Anand S Patil For Applicant A.A.Takalkar APP for State/Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 28th June, 2019 P.C. : Mentioned. At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 03/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 3rd July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 26/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Anand S Patil For Applicant S.H.Yadav APP for State/Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 11th July, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the applicant , Stand over to 25/07/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 25th July, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. Stand over to 21/08/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 21st August, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned.Stand over to 11/09/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 11th September, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 07/10/2019 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL, J DATE : 7th October, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 14/11/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 14th November, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 03/12/2019 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Shekhar Ingawle i/b. Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. …... …... Mrs.A.A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : DECEMBER 17, 2019. P.C. : Learned Counsel for the Applicant tendered medical certificate dated 10th December, 2019. Same is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. Learned APP seeks time to take instructions. Stand over to 6th January, 2020. To be listed High on Board. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Shekhar Ingawale i/b.Anand S Patil For Applicant A.A.Takalkar APP for State/respondent CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J DATE : 6th January, 2020 P.C. : Learned APP seeks time to take instructions. S.O. to 08/01/2020 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 30: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1412 OF 2019 Amol Jaywant Pawar .. Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Shekhar Ingawle i/b. Mr.Anand S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. …... …... Mrs.Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent – State. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATED : JANUARY 08, 2020. P.C. : The applicant is seeking bail on medical ground for temporary period. The applicant is in custody from 10th March, 2016 in connection with C.R.No.31 of 2016, registered with Ajara Police Station, District–Kolhapur for the ofences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B and 201 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code ("IPC", for short). 2 The applicant had earlier preferred an application for bail viz. Criminal Bail Application No.1466 of 2018. By order dated 28th August, 2018, it was directed that the jail Authorities shall ensure that the applicant is taken to Chougule Neurology Centre and Nursing Home, Kolhapur, on the date and time given for the applicant's check up and examination and for follow-up, if required. It was also observed that the applicant cannot be given treatment for the ailment, which he is sufering in C.P.R. Hospital, Kolhapur or in any Government Hospital in Kolhapur. Applicant contend that he is sufering from Lumbar and Cervical Spondylosis. In pursuant to the said order, the applicant was taken to Chougule Nursing Home. Applicant relies upon the medical certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More, attached to Abhinav Nursing Home. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was examined at Chougule Nursing Home and thereafter he was referred to Orthopedic Surgeon Dr.Sanjay More, attached to Abhinav Nursing Home. The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More is produced in support of the submission that the applicant requires medical treatment and surgery, which can be performed in the private nursing home. 3 The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More mentions as follows: "This is to certify that I, the undersigned Dr.Sanjay More, have gone through the all medical reports of Mr.Amol Jayvant Pawar, 33/M, R/o. Kolhapur and referred by Dr. Sangram Chougule, Neuro Physician, Kolhapur. As he is not responding to medical line of treatment for chronic lumbar PID with Radiography, he has been advised endoscopic laminectomy and Discectomy by a team of Neurosurgeon, Orthopedic Sargon and Neuro physician as early as possible." 4 Learned APP has tendered the report of Dr.Sanjay Padhye, Medical Oficer, Kiolhapur Central Prison, Kalamba. The applicant is detained in the said jail. The said report dated 8th January, 2020 mentions that it's a report in continuation of earlier report. As per the orders of the High Court, the patient was sent to Dr.Sanjay More, MS (Ortho) D.N.R. (ortho), as per the opinion and referral request of Neurosurgeon Dr.Sangram Chougule. As per the evaluation done by them of the said patient he requires a surgical intervention to treat him. 5 The patient wants operation done in a private hospital and hence he has moved application. The patient has been evaluated by experts and also in private hospital as per the courts permission. The xerox copy of the report of the private doctor which has been referred to herein above are annexed with the report. The report dated 8th January, 2020, is taken on record and marked "X" for identifcation. The certifcate issued by Dr.Sanjay More, tendered on the earlier occasion, is marked as "X-1", for identifcation. 5 Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that undisputedly, the treatment is not available in C.P.R. Hospital or any other Government Hospital in Kolhapur. The applicant is in custody for a period of four years. The applicant is required to undergo surgery immediately. With a view to undergo surgery and the follow-up treatment, applicant be granted bail. Learned APP relied upon the report tendered by the medical oficer, Kolhapur Central Prison. The report refers to the medical certifcate dated 10th December, 2019, issued by Dr.Sanjay More. The report confrms that the applicant has been examined by the experts. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant can be granted bail on medical ground for a period of three months. 6 Hence, I pass the following order: :: O R D E R :: (i) Bail Application No.1412 of 2019, is allowed; (ii) The Applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.31 of 2016, registered with Ajara Police Station, District– Kolhapur, for the period of three months frin the date of release on medical ground on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall intimate to concerned police station the details of his place of residence, details about his hospitalization and further details about treatment or surgery undergone by him; (iv) Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence while on bail; (v) On completion of period of three months from the date of release, the applicant shall surrender before Ajara Police Station, District–Kolhapur; (vi) Bail Application stands disposed of. ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Aashish Satpute for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th January, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 29/01/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 29th January, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 07/02/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 7th February, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 01/03/2024 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 1st March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 15/03/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 19/03/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 19th March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 15/04/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Amit Icham for Applicant. Mr. Pandruang H. Gaikwad, APP for State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th April, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 06/05/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 6th May, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 01/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 1st July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 08/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 8th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 11/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Advait Tamhankar i/by Mr. Aashish Satpute for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State/Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 11th July, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 19/07/2024 ( at 2:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 27: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 19th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 23/08/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Chaitanya Purankar i/by Mr. Amit Icham for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State/Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 23rd August, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 13/09/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 33: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ] Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra ] Respondent Mr.Advait Tamhankar i/b Aashish Satpute for the Applicant. Ms.Sangita Phad, APP for the State. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J RESERVED ON : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 3rd OCTOBER, 2024. P.C. : 1 The Applicant/Accused in Crime No.6/2022 registered with Pune ATS, is seeking regular bail. 2 The aforesaid offence is made punishable under Section 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short "NDPS Act"). 3 The Applicant, on secret inputs was apprehended on 02.05.2022 after having found in possession of 118 Grams of Mephedrone costing around Rs.11,80,000/-. The seizure carried out in the investigation of the aforesaid offence, is of commercial quantity. 4 In the aforesaid backdrop, the learned counsel for the Applicant while seeking regular bail would urge that the Respondent/Investigating Officer has failed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. So as to substantiate the aforesaid contention, my attention is invited to the nature, the mode and manner in which the recovery was effected from the Applicant. The learned counsel would urge that since it is mandatory to follow the procedure laid down in the aforesaid provisions of the NDPS Act, the Applicant is entitled to be released on bail, as the recovery was neither effected by a Gazetted Officer, nor search. 5 The learned APP, while opposing the prayer for bail would urge that not only the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 50 read with 41 to 43 of the NDPS Act is complied with, but also the report of Chemical Analyser certifies the contraband seized from the Applicant, being banned substance. It is claimed that the Applicant is already charge-sheeted and there is enough iota of evidence to directly connect the Applicant to the crime. As such, it is urged that the Application is liable to be rejected. 2/4 6 Having appreciated the rival claims, it is appreciated that on specific inputs the Applicant was apprehended on 02.05.2022 at about 6.30 p.m. and he was sensitized about his right under Section 41, 42, 43 and 50. The written consent given by the Applicant for carrying out personal search by the Police Officer sufficiently speaks of compliance of the statutory mandate as provided under the NDPS Act. 7 Apart from above, the station diary entry was made about the offence and the same was immediately forwarded to the immediate superior by the Assistant Police Inspector. As such, there is compliance of Section 42, so also Section 50. 8 Apart from above, the quantity seized from the Applicant appears to be certified by the Chemical Analyser to be a banned substance under the NDPS Act. The said quantity is commercial in nature. In the aforesaid backdrop, prima-facie, no technical flaw could be noticed in the investigation against the Applicant. Perusal of the investigation papers depict that there is strong evidence available against the Applicant so as to infer his prima facie involvement in the offence in question and the offence being grave in nature, I see no reason to consider and grant the prayer for releasing the Applicant on bail. 9 Apart from above, the Courts below have consequently rejected his regular Bail Applications by recording the cogent reasons. In this background, the Application stands rejected. (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1119 OF 2015 Shri Rohit Jaywant Mane Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil for the Applicant. Mr. Arfan Sait, A.P.P. for Respondent - State. Mr. M.V. Damase, HC/1797, Tasgaon Police Station, Dist. Sangli, present. CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED : JULY 31, 2015 P.C. :- 1 The application is moved for bail as the applicant/accused is facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2), (F), (I), (N), 366, 452, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5,(L), 6, & 8 of POCSO Act in C.R. No.255 of 2014 registered with Tasgaon Police Station, District Sangli. 2 It is the case of the prosecution that applicant/accused is paternal uncle of the prosecutrix, who is 16 years and 11 months old and school going girl. That on 9.10.2014 applicant/accused who is 27 years old, took her out culvert near a temple and raped her. Thereafter again on 3.11.2014 when she was alone in the house he raped her. He was arrested on 4.11.2014. Hence, this bail application. 3 Learned Counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that there is a discrepancy of her statement before the Medical officer and her statement recorded by the police. In the statement before the Medical officer, she did not say of the second incident of rape but she mentioned that attempt to rape on 3.11.2014. However, in the statement recorded by the police she had stated that second time also he has raped. The learned counsel submitted that it appears that she has given different versions and, therefore, benefit is to be given to the applicant/accused by releasing him on bail. 4 The learned prosecutor opposed the application. He relied on the medical certificate and her statement recorded before the police and the statement of her father. He submitted that prosecutrix was minor i.e. below 16 years old. 5 Perused all the papers, medical certificate in favour of case of the prosecutrix. Considering the contents in the F.I.R. and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded by the police, it is prima facie a case of rape. The applicant/accused is paternal uncle of the prosecutrix and prosecutrix is minor. In view of this it is not a case to grant bail. 6 The Bail Application is rejected. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 594 OF 2021 …...... …...... Atul Hanumant Kale … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent None for the Applicant. Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the State. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 17 JANUARY 2023 P.C. :- . The Registry has received this application through jail. The notification which was issued to release under-trial prisoners on bail in view of Covid-19 pandemic has ceased to exist. The present application for bail on that ground thus does not survive and the same is disposed of. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Digitally signed by KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Date: 2023.01.17 18:21:02 +0530 Kanchan P Dhuri 1 / 1

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1279 OF 2018 Chetan Bhanudas Randhire ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Adv. Mayur D. Sapkale For Applicant Adv. A. A. TAkalkar APP for State CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J DATE : 4th July, 2018 P.C. : At the request of learned APP, Stand over to 11/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1279 OF 2018 Chetan Bhanudas Randhire ....Applicant V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....Respondent Adv. Mayur D. Sapkale For Applicant Adv. A. A. Takalkar APP for State CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J DATE : 11th July, 2018 P.C. : Mentioned out of turn. Stand over to 18/07/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: BA.1279-2018.doc Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1279 OF 2018 CHETAN BHANUDAS RANDHIRE ..APPLICANT Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT Mr. M.D. Sapkale for applicant. Ms. A.A. Takalkar, APP for State. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 9th August 2018. P.C.: 1] This is an application under Section 439 of the Cr. P.C for bail in CR No.I216 of 2016 dated 6.12.2016 registered with Thanenagar Police Station, Thane now transferred under sections 420, 181, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 of the Indian Penal Code. 2] Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. Perused the chargesheet. 3] The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, the role attributed to the present is same and/or similar to that has been assigned to coaccused Amar M. Bhadrige who has been released on by by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thane by its Order dated 6th March 2017. The learned APP fairly conceded to the said fact. 1/2 4] Perusal of the chargesheet would indicate that, the present applicant has been assigned with same and/or similar role as that of the coaccused Amar M. Bhadrige who has been directed to be released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Thane by its Order dated 6th March 2017 and therefore the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. Hence, the following Order: a] Applicant Chetan Bhanudas Randhire be released on his executing P.B. and S.B of Rs.40,000/ (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amiount. b] After his release from Jail, the applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on every first Monday of the month between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 hours till conclusion of trial. c] The applicant shall furnish his photograph, address proof and shall not involve in any such offence. 5] Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (A.S.GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandrabali Yadav .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … Mr. Vaibhav Ugle for the Applicant. Mr. Suraj S. Hulke, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 18TH DECEMBER, 2020. P.C:- Learned A.P.P. to place on record the postmortem report and supply a copy of the same to learned counsel for the Applicant. Re-notify for 13/01/2021. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 25th June, 2021 P.C. : . Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Stand over to 30/06/2021 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT None for Applicant Smt. A. A. Takalkar, AGP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SARANG VIJAYKUMAR KOTWAL J DATE : 30th June, 2021 P.C. : None present for the applicant/respondent. Stand over to 26/07/2021 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … … None for the Applicant. Mrs.A.A.Takalkar, APP for the State. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : JULY 26, 2021 P.C:- None for the applicant. Stand over to 9th August, 2021 [ SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J .]

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Vaibhab Ugle with Vikas Samawanshi for the applicant. Mr.S.H. Yadav, APP for the State. … CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 5th AUGUST, 2021 P.C:- 1 To ensure compliance of the order dated 18th December 2020, list the application tomorrow i.e. 6th August 2021 for virtual hearing. SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent … Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugale for the Applicant. Mr. S.H. Yadav, A.P.P. for the State. Mr. N.B. Chapale, PSI attached to MIDC Bhosari Police Station, Pimpri Chinchwad is present in the court. … CORAM : SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 06TH AUGUST, 2021. P.C:- Learned A.P.P. states that the final opinion as to the cause of death of the deceased is received on 24/07/2021 and the death is opined to have caused on account of 'head injury'. Learned A.P.P. states that after receipt of the said report, the prosecution is in the process of adding Section 302 to the charge-sheet and necessary steps in that regard has been taken. In such circumstances, the Application cannot be considered at this stage. In any case, since the steps are taken to add Section 302 of the IPC, the Applicant is bound to receive intimation of the same and with the change in the charge, he is at liberty to circulate the present Application. [SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.]

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 1128 OF 2020 Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT None for Applicant Ms. P. N. Dabholkar APP for the State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE J DATE : 30th September, 2022 P.C. : S. O. to 15/11/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: 25-BA-1128-2020.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 ••• Mr. Ramesh C. Yadav ... Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents None for the Applicant. Smt. P.N.Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.DATE :15 th NOVEMBER, 2022. P.C. : None for the applicant. 2 Stand over to $19^{text{th}}$ December, 2022. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 22: Shailaja IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128 OF 2020 ….. ….. Ramesh Chandraballi Yadav ] Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] Respondent None for the Applicant. Mr. A.A. Palkar, A.P.P, for Respondent – State. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. DATE : 5th JANUARY, 2024. P.C. None for the applicant. Looking to the orders passed by this Court from time to time, it appears that the applicant is not interested in prosecuting the application, hence, it stands rejected. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]

Order - Status 7: 503-ba-1383-18 Nalawade FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1383 OF 2018 Pradip A. Ramchandani vs. The State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memorandam of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. S.N. Naik i/by R.D.Suryawanshi for the applicant. Mrs. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the RespondentState. CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 15th June, 2018 P.C. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, during the pendency of the present application the police have submitted charge sheet. In view of the change in circumstance, he seeks leave to withdraw the present application with liberty to file a fresh application for bail before the Trial Court. Leave and liberty granted. Disposed off as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. (A.S.GADKARI, J.) Page-1/1

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1003 OF 2015 Harish Kondu Kokare ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.for the Applicant APP, for Respondent – State CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: JUNE 16, 2015 P.C.: The applicant/accused is facing charges u/s 307, 341,34...... in C.R. No.65 of 2015 registered at Lonavla police station (Rural). A complaint was given by one A.S. Ghole on 21.4.2015. The incident of assault has taken place on 21.4.2015 at around 8.15 pm, when the complainant and one Bhau Gaikwad, who was the Sarpanch of the Panchayat Samiti, were going in a car and at that time, the applicant/accused and the co-accused came in a Zen car and the car of the complainant was stopped. They attacked the Sarpanch Bhau Gaikwad and also the complainant Ananta Gule. Bhau Gaikwad was injured as he was stabbed 5 to 6 times on chest and throat by the assailants. He was sent to hospital and the applicant/accused was arrested and taken into custody on the same day i.e., 21.4.2015 and since then, he is in prison. Hence, this bail application. The learned Counsel for the applicant/accused relied on the contents in the FIR, wherein it is stated that the applicant/accused assaulted the complainant with fist blows and there is no act of assaulting Bhau Gaikwad is mentioned. He submitted that he was not holding any weapon. It is further submitted that the applicant/accused is one of the members of the Panchayat Samiti and he did not attend two meetings of the Panchayat Samiti. Now the third meeting is scheduled on 18th June, 2015 and, therefore, if he fails to attend the said meeting, as per law, he will be debarred and his appointment will be canceled. The learned Prosecutor has opposed the application. The Investigating Officer is not present. She relied on the description of the injuries on Bhau Gaikwad. Perused the FIR. The act attributed to the applicant/accused is of giving a fist blow to the complainant. No specific act is attributed to him of assaulting Bhau Gaikwad. In view of the submission that the applicant/accused will be out of Panchayat Samiti if he does not attend the third meeting, I am inclined to grant bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed on the following terms and conditions: i) The applicant/accused shall be released on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/-, with one or two sureties in the like amount; 2 / 3 ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence; iii) The applicant shall not indulge into any kind of offence including offence on human body and especially on the Panchayat Samiti members, while on bail; iv) The applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer and attend the concerned police station on every Friday, between 6pm to 7pm, for a period of one month. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)