Shreyas Laxman Sakunde and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

No.297 of 2025 dated 31.12.2025 registered with Wathar Police Station, District Satara for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 126(2), 189(2), 189(4), 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 118(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶13

The prosecution case is that, on 30.12.2025 at about 17:30 hours, the informant was traveling on his motorcycle to drop off his cousin-sister’s daughters when intercepted near an electric tower in Arabwadi by the accused persons who arrived in a white car. Due to

¶14

Digitally signed by SAJAKALI SAJAKALI LIYAKAT LIYAKAT JAMADAR JAMADAR Date:2026.03.26 20:05:32 +0530

¶15

1 of 5

¶16

Sajakali Jamadar

¶17

17-BA-219-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶18

prior dispute, the accused allegedly obstructed the informant’s path, subjected to verbal abuse, and launched a physical assault using a steel rod, wooden sticks, and stones, causing injuries. It is further alleged that as the informant attempted to flee with his associates, they were again intercepted on the Ambavade-Banavadi road by unlawful assembly comprising the main four accused along with coaccused, all armed with rods and sticks. During this second encounter, accused Swapnil allegedly struck the informant on the head with a steel rod with the intent to cause death, while the group also brutally assaulted a bystander, Vishal, who had intervened to mediate. The prosecution contends that the accused collectively inflicted grievous injuries on both victims with the common intention to commit murder, leading to the informant’s hospitalization. Hence, the report is lodged.

¶19

Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the present case is of over-implication. There are only general and sweeping allegations against the present applicants. It is further submitted that the arrest has been effected dehors the statutory procedure. In such circumstances, the further incarceration of the applicants is not justified. Hence, prayed to allow the application.

¶20

2 of 5

¶21

Sajakali Jamadar

¶22

17-BA-219-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶23

Per contra, the learned APP opposed the application, submitting that the complicity of the applicants is apparent from the material collected by the Investigating Officer particularly the CCTV footage. It is further submitted that the investigation is still underway. An apprehension is also expressed that, if the applicants are enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of tampering with the prosecution witnesses. Hence, prayed to reject the application.

¶24

Upon considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants, learned APP and perusal of the material on record, prima facie, indicates there are no specific allegations levelled against the applicants except that of carrying steel and wooden sticks. The allegations prima facie do not indicate that the applicants assaulted the informant on any vital parts of the body. Therefore, given the nature of weapon, the injuries sustained and the alleged role of the applicants, prima facie does not suffice ingredients of Section 109 of the BNS.

¶25

As far as the CCTV footage is concerned, the reliability and veracity of the said footage is an aspect of trial and cannot be used as a sole basis to withheld liberty of the applicants.

¶26

3 of 5

¶27

Sajakali Jamadar

¶28

17-BA-219-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶29

Nevertheless, the investigation is almost complete to the extent of present applicants. The necessary recovery is carried out by the investigating agency. So far as apprehension expressed by learned APP about possibility of tampering with the prosecution witnesses is concerned, it can be adequately taken care of by imposing stringent conditions. I am, therefore, persuaded to exercise discretion in favour of applicants.

¶30

Hence, the order :-

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

I. The bail application is allowed.

¶33

II. Applicants - Shreyas Laxman Sakunde and Sanket Amar Bandal be released on bail, on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand) each with one or two local solvent sureties, in the like amount, in connection with C.R. No.297 of 2025 dated 31.12.2025 registered with Wathar Police Station, District Satara for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 126(2), 189(2), 189(4), 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 118(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the following conditions :-

¶34

4 of 5

¶35

Sajakali Jamadar

¶36

17-BA-219-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶37

(a) The applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner.

¶38

(b) The applicants shall not enter into the jurisdiction of Wathar Police Station, Tahsil Koregaon, District Satara till conclusion of trial except to attend the trial Court dates.

¶39

(c) The applicants shall attend the trial on each and every date unless exempted by the trial Court.

¶40

(d) The applicants shall submit Aadhar and Pan Cards to the Investigating Officer and detailed address, where they are likely to reside as well as their own phone numbers and that of their two near relatives.

¶41

(e) In case of breach of any of the conditions by the applicants, it is open for the Prosecution to approach the concerned Court seeking cancellation of bail, notwithstanding the fact that this Court has granted bail.

¶42

III. Needless to state that the observations rendered herein are to

¶43

the extent of this application and the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same.

¶44

[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.]

¶45

5 of 5

¶46

Sajakali Jamadar

Shreyas Laxman Sakunde and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

Shreyas Laxman Sakunde and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Akshay Basveshwar Hire vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Dattaram Bala Baikar vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Dipak Balkrushna Yadav vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bhagwan Pandurang Dinde Sahakari Dudh Vyavsayik Sanstha Maryadit vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Swargiya Chandrappa More Sahakari Dudh Vyavsayik Sanstha Maryadit Boriwade Thr. Its Chairman vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Principal Secretary and Others

Shri Lingbhairi Sahakari Dudh Vyavsayik Sanstha Maryadit Thr. Its Chairman Anant Tukaram Kasabale vs Mahadeo Sahakari Doodh Vyavsayik Snasha Maryadit