Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SACHIN BALAJI KHEDKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The court held that pre‑trial detention was unnecessary and granted bail with stringent conditions.

Summary

Omkar Vishwanath Bhure applied for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with a case involving alleged fraud, counterfeit currency and violent offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The informant claimed Bhure offered to buy gold but the transaction turned into a counterfeit‑currency deal, after which a police officer co‑accused seized cash and threatened the informant. The prosecution highlighted the seriousness of the charges, the applicant’s eight‑month custody, a pending counterfeit‑currency case in Telangana and the risk of witness tampering, while the defence argued inconsistencies in the informant’s statements, lack of recovered money and the possibility of securing attendance through conditions. The court examined the gravity of the offences, the applicant’s role, antecedents and flight risk without deciding the merits of the evidence. Concluding that continued pre‑trial detention was unnecessary, the court granted bail with a personal bond of ₹50,000 and a series of stringent conditions, and disposed of the accompanying criminal application.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 483 BNS given the seriousness of the offences and risk of flight or witness tampering.
  • Whether the change in the informant’s version of the transaction affects the credibility sufficient to deny bail.
  • Whether the pending antecedent case in Telangana influences the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • pre‑trial detention
  • counterfeit currency
  • criminal procedure
  • witness tampering
  • Section 483
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • serious offences
  • police officer co‑accused

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:43457
                                               -1-
                                                                        BA-1403-2026

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1403 OF 2026
                                          WITH
                          CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3097 OF 2026

                                OMKAR VISHWANATH BHURE
                                          VERSUS
                                THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                ..…
              Mr. Suraj R. Bagal h/f. Mr. Bharat N. Gadegaonkar, Advocate for
              Applicant .
              Mr. S. D. Ghayal, Advocate for Respondent – State.
              Mr. P. S. Anerao, Advocate for informant/Assist to APP (Thr. V.C.)
                                                .....

                                          CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                                          DATED : 21st SEPTEMBER 2026
              ORDER :


              1.        By present application , the applicant - Omkar Vishwanath

              Bhure seeks regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

              Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 23

              of 2026 registered at Loha Police Station, District Nanded, for

              offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 309(6),

              351(2) and (3), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,

              2023.


              2.        It is the case of the informant Sachin Khedkar, as alleged

              in the First Information report dated 20th January, 2026 that the

              applicant, who happens to be his relative, offered to supply gold

              worth ₹1 crore for ₹60 lakh. According to the report, the applicant
                                -2-
                                                        BA-1403-2026

called him to a building which is an under construction building at

Pardi on 17th January, 2026, received the cash and left on the

pretext of bringing the gold. The informant subsequently stated

that the proposed transaction concerned counterfeit currency, and

that Co-accused Rajesh Munde, who is a police officer, and other co

accused arrived at the building, assaulted and threatened the

informant, and took away the cash. The additional offences were

then accordingly invoked. The investigation has resulted in filing

of a charge sheet.


3.      Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

informant has given materially different accounts of the purpose

and manner of the transaction. He points out that no part of the

alleged ₹60 lakh has been recovered from the applicant, who has

remained in custody since 29th January, 2026. He submits that the

investigation is complete, the applicant has a fixed residence, and

his attendance can be secured by conditions. Reliance is also placed

on the interim protection granted to the co-accused Rajesh Munde.


4.      The learned APP opposes bail. He submits that the

applicant is alleged to have arranged the meeting and brought the

informant to the place where the cash was taken. The prosecution

relies on the statements of persons present, material concerning

the informant’s injuries, and recorded conversations between the
                                 -3-
                                                          BA-1403-2026

applicant and the informant after the incident. It also points to a

pending case registered against the applicant in Telangana

concerning counterfeit currency and expresses apprehension that,

if released, he may influence witnesses or assist the other accused.


5.       Upon hearing the respective counsels and perusing the

investigation report it can be stated that the allegations are

serious. Section 309(6) of BNS carries a substantial punishment,

including the possibility of imprisonment for life. The Applicants

submissions that the change in the version of the complainant

from a proposed gold purchase transaction           to a counterfeit

currency transaction is material, but its effect on the credibility of

the informant cannot be finally decided at the bail stage. Neither

can the case be treated as a purely civil dispute nor as one without

supporting material. The recorded conversations, including the

alleged suggestion by the applicant about what the informant

should tell the police, require examination at trial. The pending

antecedent of Telangana case is also relevant to the assessment of

risk, although it is still a pending trial and have not led into

conviction.


6.       While considering the application for bail the Court must

consider the applicant’s particular role, the gravity of the

accusation, his antecedents, and the risks of flight, repetition of
                                   -4-
                                                           BA-1403-2026

commission of offence or interference with witnesses; it must do so

without conducting a trial on the evidence. Here in the present

case, the applicant has been in custody for nearly eight months and

the charge sheet has been filed. The allegation that Co-accused

Rajesh Munde and the persons accompanying him took the cash

calls for distinct consideration of their respective roles. Nothing

has been recovered from the applicant. The prosecution’s concern

about witness influence is real, particularly because the applicant

and informant are related, but it can presently be addressed by

stringent conditions. Interim protection granted to Co accused

Munde is not, by itself, a ground of parity for the applicant.


7.          Having weighed these circumstances together, I am

satisfied that further pretrial detention of the applicant is

unnecessary, provided his liberty is curtailed by imposing

stringent conditions. Hence, the following order :

                                ORDER

      (i)     The application is allowed.

      (ii)    The applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No. 23
      of 2026 registered at Loha Police Station, District Nanded, on
      furnishing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one or two
      sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
      concerned court, subject to the following conditions:


              a) He shall attend every date before the trial court
                                      -5-
                                                             BA-1403-2026

                  unless exempted by that court, and shall cooperate
                  with any further investigation lawfully undertaken.

                b) He shall not contact, threaten, induce or otherwise
                  approach the informant or any prosecution witness,
                  directly or through another person, concerning this
                  case.

                c) He shall report to Loha Police Station on the first
                  Monday of each month between 10.00 a.m. and
                  12.00 noon for three months from his release.

                d) He shall give the investigating officer and the trial
                  court his current residential address and mobile
                  number and shall promptly notify them of any
                  change.

                e) He shall not leave India without the trial court’s
                  prior permission.

                f) He shall not tamper with evidence or obstruct the
                  trial. The prosecution may seek cancellation of bail if
                  any condition is breached.

                g) The Trial Court shall decide the case independently
                  of the observations in this order.

          (iii) In view of disposal of Bail Application, Criminal
          Application No. 3097 Of 2026 also stands disposed. of.


                                            (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR)
                                                   JUDGE
Tandale


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.