Appa Dnyandev Mane vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Appa Dnyandev Mane vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail in Crime No. 509 of 2020 (Rajgad Police Station, Pune) on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions that the Applicant shall not tamper with evidence or influence prosecution witnesses and shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required; Trial Court to decide the case on its own merits uninfluenced by the observations in this order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant is entitled to regular bail on the principle of parity, having been in custody for over five years and eight months with no progress in the trial, while co-accused facing similar allegations have been released on bail.

Court's answer

The Applicant, in custody for more than five years with co-accused having similar allegations already released on bail, is entitled to bail on the principle of parity.

Ratio / Principle

The Applicant is to be released on bail in Crime No. 509 of 2020 on furnishing a PR bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

Key takeaways

As a condition of bail, the Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.ratio¶26
As a condition of bail, the Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required.ratio¶28
The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Shivkumar Dige, J.) allowed the regular bail application of Appa Dnyandev Mane, accused in Crime No. 509 of 2020 (Rajgad Police Station, Pune) under Ss. 395, 397, 307, 170 and 171 IPC, S. 3(5) Arms Act and Ss. 3(1)(i)(ii) and 3(4) MCOCA, arising from an alleged dacoity in a jewellery shop on 6 August 2020 in which the Applicant allegedly fired a revolver. With the Applicant in custody for over five years and eight months, no progress in the trial, and co-accused with similar allegations already released on bail, bail was granted on the principle of parity on a PR bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties, subject to conditions of non-tampering with evidence/witnesses and attendance at the concerned Police Station; the Trial Court was directed to decide the case uninfluenced by the observations in the order.

35-BA-2402-2025 (CR).doc

N.S.Kamble

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2402 OF 2025

Appa Dnyandev Mane ...Applicant VERSUS State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent

Digitally signed NILAM by NILAM SANTOSH SANTOSHKAMBLE KAMBLE Date: 2026.05.05 11:39:19 +0530

Ms.Shubhangi Parulekar, for the Applicant. (Through V.C.) Ms.S.G. Talhar, APP for Respondent-State. Mr.Tukaram D. Rathod, API, Raigad Police Station, Pune Rural.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 28^th APRIL 2026

P.C. :

. By this Application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.509 of 2020 registered with Rajgad Police Station, Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397, 307, 170 and 171 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short), Sections 3(5) of the Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(i)(ii) and 3(4) of the The Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (‘MCOCA Act’ for short).

It is prosecution’s case that on 6^th August 2020, the Applicant and co-accused committed dacoity in the jewellery shop of the First Informant and Applicant open fired on the First Informant and other people gathered there using a revolver with an intention to kill them.

Page 1 of 3

35-BA-2402-2025 (CR).doc

N.S.Kamble

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the Applicant is behind bars for more than five years and eight months. There is no progress in trial. The co-accused having similar allegations have been released on bail. Hence, the Applicant is entitled for bail on principle of parity and requested to allow the Application.

It is contention of learned APP that, the Applicant fired at First Informant and people gathered there with an intention to kill them. The Applicant has antecedents. If the Applicant released on bail, he may abscond or threaten First Informant and prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the Application.

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.

The Applicant is behind bars for more than Five years. The coaccused having similar allegations have been released on bail. Hence, the Applicant is entitled for bail on principle of parity and I pass following order.

ORDER

(i) The Applicant be released on bail in Crime No.509 of

2020 registered with Rajgad Police Station, Pune, on

Page 2 of 3

35-BA-2402-2025 (CR).doc

N.S.Kamble

furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

(iv) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required.

(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Page 3 of 3