SACHIN VITTHAL SOLAT AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

                                1                      3ba1490.26



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

               3 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1490 OF 2026
                              WITH
                BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1476 OF 2026
                              WITH
                BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1402 OF 2026
                              WITH
                BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1479 OF 2026
                              WITH
              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3418 OF 2026
                         IN BA/1476/2026
                              WITH
              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3419 OF 2026
                         IN BA/1479/2026
                              WITH
              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3423 OF 2026
                         IN BA/1402/2026
                              WITH
              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3424 OF 2026
                         IN BA/1490/2026

                      YOGESH RAMESH DOIFODE
                                VERSUS
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                    ...
   Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Satej S. Jadhav h/f Mr. Gore Ravindra
    Vitthal and Mr. S. R. Shinde (in BA/1490/2026), Mr.J.S. Jain (in
 Cri.Appln./3424/2026, Cri.Appln./3423/2026), Mr. Mahesh L. Muthai
and Mr. Suraj Govind Dhormare (in BA/1402/2026, in BA/1479/2026
& Cri. Appln./3418/2026, in BA/1476/2026 & Cri. Appln./3419/2026),
                APP for Respondents/State: Mr. K.K. Naik
  Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Jitendra Jain h/f Mr. Riyaz Latif
                                 pathan
                                    ...


                             CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                             DATE    : 07.09.2026
PER COURT :


1.         Heard the learned Advocate for the applicant/s, the learned

APP for Respondent No. 1/State, respectively and the learned Advocate
                                 2                        3ba1490.26



appears for respondent No. 2.


2.          The present applications are for regular bail filed by the

applicant/s in connection with Crime No. 402 of 2026, registered with

Bidkin Police Station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for offences

punishable under Sections 109, 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352,

351(2), 3513), 324(4), 125(a) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.



3.          The present applicants are arraigned as an accused persons

and have been arrested in connection with the alleged offences on

12.06.2026. Since then they are in custody. The investigation is

complete and the charge-sheet has been filed.



4.          The prosecution story in brief is that on the date of incident

i.e. on 11.06.2026, at about 10.00 p.m. in the night, when the informant

was shutting his hotel, at that relevant time, the present applicants

along with other co-accused persons came near the hotel and quarreled

with the informant as to why he is shutting the hotel and they want to

consume the liquor. The informant told them that it is a time of closing

hotel, and therefore, now no liquor can be served. Getting angry of this,

it is alleged that the applicant Pratim assaulted the informant with steel

rod on his head and thereafter accused Aditya assaulted him with fist

and blows, accused Vishal assaulted the informant with stone and

accused Sachin assaulted the informant with stick. It is the allegation

against the Yogesh that in order to prevent the informant from
                                   3                      3ba1490.26



contacting any other, he broke his Cell Phone. Due to the assault caused

by the applicants, the informant sustained injury to his head and

forearm and it is alleged that the eye witness, who came to rescue the

informant, was also assaulted on his forearm. The informant was then

carried to the hospital and in the hospital, while taking treatment his

statement came to be recorded, which came to be culminated into

lodging of the FIR against the accused persons for the alleged offences.



5.          The investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has

already been filed. All the learned Advocates for the applicants submit

that the injuries that have been caused are simple in nature and now

that the investigation is complete, the further custody of the applicants

is unwarranted.



6.          The learned APP for the State argues that the applicants are

habitual offenders and have criminal antecedents. The learned APP

further submits that the applicants are always prepared with deadly

weapons, and therefore, they can be bracketed as harden criminals.



7.          Taking into consideration the manner of assault levelled

against the informant the injuries caused to him, and the threats issued

to him not to disclose the incident to police, the same are in themselves,

sufficient to reject the present bail applications.
                                  4                         3ba1490.26



8.          The learned Advocate appearing for the Original Informant

submits that even on triable issue the applicants become so aggressive

and commits the criminal offences. He further submits that the

applicants do not deserve to continue to reside in the society, and

therefore, their bail applications should be rejected.



9.          Taking into consideration the nature of allegations, gravity of

the offences, as well as the nature of the injuries that have been caused

to the informant coupled with the fact that the investigation is complete

and charge sheet has already been filed.



10,         The record further indicates that the applicants were

arrested on 12.06.2026 and since then they are in custody till date.

Though the investigation specifically reveals that the assault has been

caused on the informant and the injuries have been sustained at the

hands of the present applicants, still it is important to note that the

injuries that are caused are simple in nature.           The eye witness’s

statement that has been recorded and there is a slight discrepancy

between the statement given to the police and the statement recorded

under Section 183 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for

short “B.N.S.S.”). However, without going into the merits of these

statements, at this stage, the Court is required to consider the fact

whether the continued custody of the applicants is necessary. Taking

into consideration that the injuries are simple in nature and the
                                  5                       3ba1490.26



investigation is already complete, I do not find any reason to continue

the custody of the present applicants.



11.         In the above circumstances the applications stands allowed.

Hence the following order :

                                  ORDER

(i)   All the applicants are released on bail.

ii)    The applicants shall be released on bail in Crime No. 402 of 2026,
registered    with   Bidkin    Police    Station,   District  Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar, for offences punishable under Sections 109, 189(2),
191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 3513), 324(4), 125(a) of the
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on furnishing their personal bonds of Rs.
50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety each
in the like amount, subject to the following conditions :

         a)     The applicants shall attend the Bidkin Police Station
         on every First Monday of the month, till framing the charge
         as and attend the said Police Station, as and when called by
         the Investigating Officer, unless his attendance is
         specifically exempted.

         b)    The applicants are directed to stay outside of the
         Paithan Taluka, till the evidence of the informant is recorded
         before the trial Court.

         c)    Any breach of the condition shall entitle the
         respondent/informant as well as the prosecution to prefer
         the application for cancellation of the bail.

         d)    The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, contact,
         threaten, induce or influence the informant or any
         prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the
         prosecution evidence.

         e)   The applicant shall furnish his current residential
         addresses and mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer
                                     6                        3ba1490.26



             and the trial Court within seven days of release, intimate
             any change forthwith, and attend the Investigating Officer
             upon prior written notice if further investigation is required.

             f)     The applicant shall not leave India without prior
             permission of the trial Court and, if he possess passports,
             shall deposit the same with the trial Court within seven days
             of their release.

             g)     The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence
             of a similar nature while on bail.

             h)    Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the
             prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail.

             i)    All observations in this order are prima facie and
             confined to the decision of this bail application. The trial
             Court shall decide the case independently on the evidence
             led before it. The Bail Application is disposed of in the above
             terms.

             j)    All the pending Criminal Applications, if any, shall
             stand disposed of.




                                         (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)




mahajansb/