Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Anil Rama Kale vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Home
Bombay HC
2026
Anil Rama Kale vs the State of MaharashtraAnil Rama Kale v. the State of Maharashtra

Allowed¶22

Anil Rama Kale v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC6 Feb 2026BA/221/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anil Rama Kale v. State of Maharashtra, Bail Application No. 221 of 2026, High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, decided 17 March 2026 by Rajnish R. Vyas, J. Grant of regular bail under Sections 3(5) and 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025 of Beed Gramin Police Station (snatching of gold chain, ring, bracelet, papers, cheque books and silver coin after assaulting driver near Sambhaji Chowk, Beed). Grounds: applicant not named in FIR, arrested 21 December 2025; no test identification parade conducted; no recovery at applicant's instance; connecting material to prove charge prima facie not on record. Released on P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with like surety, with conditions on witnesses/evidence and cancellation clause. Keywords: bail, BNS Section 3(5), BNS Section 309(6), test identification parade, recovery, prima facie case, Beed Gramin Police Station.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed; applicant to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with solvent surety in the like amount in connection with F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025, subject to conditions that he shall not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, and that registration of a similar offence against him would result in cancellation of bail. ¶22

Why is it important?

The court concluded that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for bail, since the connecting material to prove the charge is prima facie not produced on record (no test identification parade conducted; no recovery at the instance of the present applicant), and accordingly allowed the bail application. ¶17

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail application allowed; applicant to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with solvent surety in the like amount in connection with F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025, subject to conditions that he shall not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, and that registration of a similar offence against him would result in cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, who was not named in F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025 and was arrested during investigation, is entitled to be released on bail, given that no test identification parade was conducted and there is no recovery at his instance.

Court's answer

The court concluded that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for bail, since the connecting material to prove the charge is prima facie not produced on record (no test identification parade conducted; no recovery at the instance of the present applicant), and accordingly allowed the bail application.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Regular bail granted to applicant who was not named in F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025 (Beed Gramin Police Station, Dist. Beed) registered for offences punishable under Sections 3(5) and 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Prosecutor fairly admitted that no test identification parade was conducted, and it was not disputed that there was no recovery at the instance of the present applicant (recovery, per counsel relying on page 84 of the charge-sheet, being from co-accused Rahul Kale). Court held the applicant had made out a prima facie case since the connecting material to prove the charge was prima facie not produced on record. Bail allowed on P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with solvent surety in like amount, with conditions against influencing witnesses/tampering with evidence and a direction that registration of a similar offence would result in cancellation of bail. (Paras 2, 4 and Order; Coram: Rajnish R. Vyas, J.; decided 17th March 2026.)

A

938-BA-221-26.odt

2026:BHC-AUG:11543

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 221 OF 2026

Anil Rama Kale ..APPLICANT

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT

Mr. A.N. Nagargoje, Advocate for applicant Mr. S.V. Hange, A.P.P. for respondent – State

CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. DATE : 17^th MARCH, 2026

PER COURT :

. This is an application for grant of bail by the applicant, who was not named in the F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025 dated 26^th September, 2025 registered with Beed Gramin Police Station, Dist. Beed for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5) and 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

The said F.I.R. was registered by Shridharbabu Kadba against three unknown persons, who has stated that on 25^th September, 2025 when the vehicle in which he alongwith his driver was traveling, as he wanted to sleep, vehicle was stopped near Sambhaji Chowk, Beed. After sometime at about 05:20 a.m., three unknown persons came, opened the door of the vehicle,

1 / 3

938-BA-221-26.odt

took out the driver and assaulted him. Thereafter they forcibly snatched the gold chain, ring and bracelet, so also the bag containing various papers, cheque books and silver coin. On the basis of aforesaid information, criminal law was set in motion. During the course of investigation the applicant was arrested on 21^st December, 2025. So far as recovery is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P., relying upon page no.84 of the charge-sheet, submit that it was from the co-accused – Rahul Kale. In this background, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that since the accused were not subjected for test identification, prima facie case is not make out against the accused persons.

Per contra, learned A.P.P. contended that the manner in which the incident had taken place, would clearly reveal that the accused had an intention to commit the offence and the maximum punishment prescribed is of life imprisonment.

With the help of respective counsels I have gone through the record of the case. The F.I.R. in question was registered against the unknown persons. The prosecutor has fairly admitted that no test identification parade was conducted. It is further not disputed that there is no recovery at the instance of present applicant. Accordingly, I come to the conclusion that the applicant has made out prima facie case, since the connecting material to

2 / 3

938-BA-221-26.odt

prove the charge is prima facie not produced on record. In that view of the matter, following order is passed :-

ORDER

(I) Bail application is allowed.

(II) The applicant be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with solvent surety in the like amount, in connection with F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025 dated 26^th September, 2025 registered with Beed Gramin Police Station, Dist. Beed for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5) and 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(III) The applicant shall not influence the witnesses and tamper the evidence.

(IV) Registration of similar offence against the present applicant would result into cancellation of bail granted in his favour.

( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. )

SSD

3 / 3

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the applicant, who was not named in F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025 and was arrested during investigation, is entitled to be released on bail, given that no test identification parade was conducted and there is no recovery at his instance.¶11
The court held
The court concluded that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for bail, since the connecting material to prove the charge is prima facie not produced on record (no test identification parade conducted; no recovery at the instance of the present applicant), and accordingly allowed the bail application.ratio¶17

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita3(5)¶11 309(6)¶11

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025 dated 26th September 2025 registered with Beed Gramin Police Station, Dist. Beed by informant Shridharbabu Kadba against three unknown persons for offences punishable under Sections 3(5) and 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, arising out of an incident of 25th September 2025 near Sambhaji Chowk, Beed, in which the driver accompanying the informant was assaulted and a gold chain, ring, bracelet, a bag containing papers, cheque books and a silver coin were snatched.¶12
Prior proceeding
Applicant (not named in the F.I.R.) arrested on 21st December 2025 during the course of investigation.¶15
Prior proceeding
As submitted by learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. relying upon page no.84 of the charge-sheet, the recovery was from co-accused Rahul Kale.¶15
Prior proceeding
Prosecutor fairly admitted that no test identification parade was conducted; further not disputed that there is no recovery at the instance of the present applicant.¶17

Parties & counsel

AI extract

applicant
Anil Rama Kale¶5
A.N. Nagargoje
respondent
State of Maharashtra¶7
S.V. Hange

Coram

AI extract

RAJNISH R. VYASauthor¶9

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Bombay HC
Decided on: 6 Feb 2026 · February
Registered: 2 Feb 2026
Case no.: BA/221/2026
CNR: HCBM030047872026
Bench: Rajnish R. Vyas
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Case type: BAIL APPLICATION

All orders in this case

2 orders share this CNR

6 Feb 2026Order 1 — this page · Rajnish R. Vyas
17 Mar 2026Order 2 · Rajnish R. Vyas

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Rajnish R. Vyas

Dineshsingh S/O Lalsingh Bais vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Sadar Dist. Nagpur
5 Feb 2026
Lokesh Madanmohan Yelne vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Tah and Dist. Bhandara
5 Feb 2026
Yousuf Khan S/O Mohammad Mahboob vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Gittikhadan, Nagpur
5 Feb 2026
Shakti S/O Sheshrao Kanake vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Pandharkawada, Dist. Yavatmal
6 Feb 2026
Sheikh Azharuddin @ Ajju Sheikh vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Pandharkawada Dist. Yavatmal
6 Feb 2026
Vinod Laxman Nandurkar and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Chandrapur City, Tq. Dist. Chandrapur
6 Feb 2026

Cite this judgement

Anil Rama Kale v. the State of Maharashtra, BA/221/2026 (BOM), decided on 6 February 2026.

The Bombay High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita3(5) · 309(6)

View all statutes

Procedural history4

F.I.R. No. 316 of 2025 dated 26th September 2025 registered with Beed Gramin Police Station, Dist. Beed by informant Shridharbabu Kadba against three unknown persons for offences punishable under Sections 3(5) and 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, arising out of an incident of 25th September 2025 near Sambhaji Chowk, Beed, in which the driver accompanying the informant was assaulted and a gold chain, ring, bracelet, a bag containing papers, cheque books and a silver coin were snatched.
Applicant (not named in the F.I.R.) arrested on 21st December 2025 during the course of investigation.

View full history

Bench / Coram

RAJNISH R. VYAS

Parties & counsel