Sai Alias Rohit Saluba Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

1] Heard. For the reasons stated in Criminal Application No.2457 of 2025 for assisting to the P.P., the same is allowed. Criminal Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶12

2] Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned APP for the respondent-State and the learned counsel for assist to P.P.

¶13

3] The applicant is seeking bail as he is arrested on 15.10.2024 in connection with Crime No.0605/2024, registered with CIDCO Police Station, Taluka and District Aurangabad, for the offence punishable under Sections 109,

¶14

2

¶15

955.25BA

¶16

118 (1), 115 (2), 352, 189 (2), 191 (2), 191 (3), 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶17

4] The case against the present applicant is that the applicant along with co-accused have assaulted the informant and brother of the informant. As such, the FIR is registered against the present applicant.

¶18

5] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is arrested on 15.10.2024 and he is in jail since then. He further submits that there are no antecedents against the present applicant. He further submits that this Court, by order dated 17.04.2025 in Bail Application No.395 of 2025, has granted bail in favour of the coaccused. Considering the said fact, the bail should be granted in favour of the applicant.

¶19

6] The learned counsel for assist to P.P. submits that the persons, who are granted bail, are again arrested in connection with another crime and that this is an organized gang and if the applicant is released on bail, there may be further offence at the instance of the present applicant. However, the learned APP has not pointed out any criminal antecedents.

¶20

7] The applicant is in custody from 15.10.2024. The applicant has assaulted the brother of the informant by

¶21

3

¶22

955.25BA

¶23

means of Ujjain wooden sticks on his leg, so also, on face and the brother of the informant has suffered grievous injuries and the injured was admitted in the hospital for long time. The learned counsel for the applicant has on instructions submitted that the applicant would not enter the City of Aurangabad till completion of trial Court except on the date of trial. Considering that recovery is done at the instance of the applicant, so also, there are no criminal antecedents against the present applicant and the applicant is in custody from 15.10.2024, the applicant is granted bail. The application is allowed in the following terms :

¶24

a] The applicant shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.0605/2024, registered with CIDCO Police Station, Taluka and District Aurangabad, for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 118 (1), 115 (2), 352, 189 (2), 191 (2), 191 (3), 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶25

b] The applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Aurangabad City during pendency of the trial, except the date of trial.

¶26

4

¶27

955.25BA

¶28

c] The applicant, upon being released on bail, shall not contact the informant, in any manner whatsoever, during the pendency of the trial. d] The applicant shall co-operate with the trial Court and he shall attend each and every date, unless exempted by the trial Court.

¶29

e] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution and he shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.

¶30

f] The applicant, upon being released on bail, shall place on record of the trial Court the details of his Contact Number and residential address with updates in case of any change.

¶31

8] Needless to say, in case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions, the bail granted to the applicant shall be liable to be cancelled. It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present bail application. The concerned Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.

¶32

9] The application stands disposed of.

¶33

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE

¶34

DDC

Sai Alias Rohit Saluba Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sai Alias Rohit Saluba Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zaverchand Damji Haria through Constituted Attorney Jaimin Zaverchand Haria vs Arihant Sra Chs Ltd.

Dattarao Baburao Chopade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Ganesh Alias Ganni Prakash Pandhare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhaskar Onkar Mali and Another vs National Highway Authority of India Thru. Its Project Director Shivaji v. Pawar

National Highways Authority Of India through its Project Director Shivaji v. Pawar vs Kalpana Sudhir Bhalerao and Another

National Highways Authority of India Thru. Its Project Director Shivaji v. Pawar vs Bhaskar Onkar Mali and Others