Kunal Balaso Shitole vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Kunal Balaso Shitole vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail in Crime No. 188 of 2024 (Urulikanchan Police Station, District Pune) on executing P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions that the applicant attend the concerned police station as and when required and not tamper with evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case; application allowed and disposed of in those terms.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail in Crime No. 188 of 2024 (Sections 307, 323, 506, 120-B read with 34 IPC) having regard to his custody of more than one year and six months, absence of progress in the trial, and the release on bail of a co-accused against whom similar allegations are made (principle of parity).

Court's answer

The applicant is entitled to bail on the principle of parity, since he has been in custody for more than one year and six months, there is no progress in the trial, and the co-accused against whom similar allegations are made has been released on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 188 of 2024 (Urulikanchan Police Station, District Pune) on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

Key takeaways

Bail is subject to conditions: the applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required, and shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.ratio¶23
The observations in the order were made only for the purpose of granting bail; the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations in this order.obiter¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Shivkumar Dige, J.), by order dated 20 January 2026 in Bail Application No. 3381 of 2025, granted regular bail to Kunal Balaso Shitole, accused in Crime No. 188 of 2024 of Urulikanchan Police Station, District Pune, for offences under Sections 307, 323, 506, 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, arising from an allegation that on 30 May 2024 the applicant and co-accused attempted to run over the first informant and his friend with a speeding car with intent to kill them. Granting bail on the principle of parity — the co-accused facing similar allegations having been released — and noting the applicant's custody exceeding one year and six months with no progress in the trial, the Court enlarged him on a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties, with conditions of police-station attendance and non-tampering/non-contact, clarifying that its observations were confined to the bail purpose and the Trial Court would decide the case uninfluenced.

62-BA-3381-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BAIL APPLICATION NO.3381 of 2025

Kunal Balaso Shitole … Applicant/s Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent/s

Mr. Kuldeep Nikam, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. M. G.Patil, APP for Respondent-State.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 20^th JANUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 188 of 2024 registered with Urulikanchan Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 506 , 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860.

It is the prosecution’s case that on 30^th May 2024, around 2:30 pm, the applicant and co-accused attempted attempted to run over the first informant and his friend by driving a car at high speed, with the intention to kill them.

SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.01.22 19:18:39 +0530

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for one year and six months. There is no progress in the trial. The co-accused, against whom similar allegations are made,

Page 1 of 3

62-BA-3381-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

has been released on bail. Hence, requested to allow the application.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant and coaccused attempted to hit the first informant and his friend with a speeding car with the intention to kill them on the ground of an old dispute. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond and threaten prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.

I have heard learned counsel and perused the charge-sheet and documents produced on record. The applicant is behind bars for more than one year and six months. There is no progress in trial. The coaccused, against whom similar allegations are made, has been released on bail. Hence, the applicant is entitled to bail on the principle of parity. Considering these facts, I pass the following order:

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 188 of 2024 registered with Urulikanchan 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.

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

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person

Page 2 of 3

62-BA-3381-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

concerned with the case.

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

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.

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

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Page 3 of 3