Bombay High Court

RAOSAHEB BHIMRAJ PAGAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED
Bench: SHAILESH P BRAHME

Holding

The court held that bail must be granted as there is no direct evidence against the accused and no criminal antecedents.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Raosaheb Pagare, who was charged under IPC sections 395 and 397 and MCOCA sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) for assault and rioting. The applicant argued that there was no direct evidence against him, that the test identification parade was the only piece of evidence, and that he had no criminal antecedents. The prosecution contended that incriminating material had been uncovered during investigation and that the applicant was involved in a serious offence. The court examined the charge sheet, noting the lack of direct evidence and the applicant's clean antecedent record, and concluded that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a cash bond and surety, with conditions to not tamper with evidence or contact witnesses.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case under IPC sections 395, 397 and MCOCA sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) in the absence of direct evidence.
Whether the test identification parade constitutes sufficient incriminating evidence to deny bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 395, 397
Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act — s. 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4)

Subjects

bail
MCOCA
identification parade
IPC 395
IPC 397
criminal antecedents
court order

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:12612




                                             1                          904 ba 1164.25

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1164 OF 2025

                        Raosaheb S/o Bhimraj Pagare,
                        Age : 35 Years, Occu. : Labour,
                        R/o Padegaon, Tq. Kopergaon,
                        Dist. Ahmedngar                         .. Applicant

                             Versus

                        The State of Maharashtra                ..   Respondents

                 Shri Nilesh S. Ghanekar, Advocate for the Applicant.
                 Shri A. R. Kale, Addl.P.P. for the Respondent.

                                   CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
                                    DATE : 24TH MARCH, 2026.

                 ORDER :


                 .      Heard both sides. Applicant is seeking enlargement on bail
                 in respect of offence bearing Cr. No. 296 of 2023 registered with
                 Shivur Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad for the offences
                 punishable U/Sec. 395, 397 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.
                 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime
                 Act.


                 2.     This is his first attempt for regular bail after filing of
                 charge sheet.    His application was rejected by the Additional
                 Sessions Judge – 1, Vaijapur on 13.11.2024.


                 3.     Learned counsel Mr. Ghanekar for the applicant submits
                            2                           904 ba 1164.25

that there is no direct evidence against the applicant. The test
identification parade is only piece of evidence. No incriminating
role is surfacing against the applicant. No criminal antecedents
are recorded against him. Just because co-accused were having
criminal antecedents, the provisions of the Maharashtra Control
of Organized Crime Act are applied.


4.    Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent –
State submits that incriminating material is found against the
applicant during the course of investigation. The people were
required to chase accused persons who committed assault and
riot. It is submitted that applicant is involved in serious offence.


5.    I have gone through the charge sheet.        My attention is
adverted to recovery panchanama, test identification parade as
well as list of criminal antecedents of the accused involved in the
crime.


6.    Applicant is arrested on 09.11.2023. Charge sheet is filed
on 04.05.2024. There is sufficient incarceration of the applicant.
There is no direct evidence against him. The test identification
parade cannot be said to be incriminating evidence at this stage.
There are no criminal antecedents against him. I find that case
is made out by the applicant for enlarging him on bail.             I,
therefore, pass following order.
                            3                       904 ba 1164.25

                            ORDER

A.    The bail application is allowed.


B.    Applicant – Raosaheb S/o Bhimraj Pagare shall be released
on bail in respect of Cr. No. 296 of 2023 registered with Shivur
Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad for the offences punishable
U/Sec. 395, 397 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 3(1)(ii), 3(2),
3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act on
furnishing P. R. bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rs. Thirty thousands only)
with one solve surety of like amount.


C.    The applicant shall not tamper the evidence or contact
with the prosecution witnesses.


D.    He shall furnish his phone number and address to the
Investigating Officer.


E.    Bail application is disposed of.



                                [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ]


bsb/March 26

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…