Aditya Sharad Shinde vs the State of Maharashtra

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 19 of 2025 registered with Sant Tukaram Nagar Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 238 and 3(5) of the the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶10

It is prosecution's case that the applicant was sitting near co-accused – auto rikshaw driver, in whose rickshaw, after the murder, the dead body of the deceased was carried.

¶11

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHUBHADA SHANKAR SHANKAR KADAM KADAM Date: 2026.04.27 19:37:17 +0530

¶12

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the allegations against the applicant are that he was sitting with the rickshaw driver. The applicant is behind bars for more than one year and three months. The applicant has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial, and requested to allow the application.

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

25-BA-159-2026 (CR).doc

¶15

Shubhada S Kadam

¶16

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was actively involved in the commission of the crime. The CCTV footage produced on record shows that the applicant was sitting near the co-accused-who was driving the auto rickshaw. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the application.

¶17

I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. From the statement of the witness, it appears that the main allegation is against the co-accused. There is no reference to the applicant in the statement of the prosecution witness. It is alleged that the dead body of the deceased was carried to YCM Hospital in the auto rickshaw of the co-accused and the applicant was sitting near the rikshaw driver. To prove the allegations against the applicant, trial is required. The applicant has no antecedents. He is behind bars for more than one year and three months. Considering these facts, I pass following order:

¶18

ORDER

¶19

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 19 of 2025 registered with Sant Tukaram Nagar Police Station, District Pune, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

25-BA-159-2026 (CR).doc

¶22

Shubhada S Kadam

¶23

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

¶24

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to

¶25

influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

¶26

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶27

It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶28

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Aditya Sharad Shinde v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Sharad Shinde v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anil Gorakhnath Mhaske vs the State of Maharashtra

Amir Uddin Laskar vs the State of Maharashtra

Mangesh Satish Vairat vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Prashant Rajaram Bhoye vs State of Maharashtra

Sohail Ayub Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra

Md. Monazir Hassan vs the Union of India and Anr.