Bombay High Court
SACHIN MADHUKAR TAYDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The bail application is allowed and the applicant is released on bail.
Summary
The applicant, Sachin Madhukar Tayde, was arrested for allegedly striking a witness, Sunil, on the head with a stick during a quarrel that originated from a political dispute between the informant and Accused No.1. The prosecution alleged a single simple injury caused by the applicant, while the defense argued that his role was minimal and that the ingredients of Section 307 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita were not met. The court examined the charge‑sheet, injury certificate, and noted that the investigation was complete and the charge‑sheet filed. Finding that the alleged injury was simple in nature and that there was no evidence of conspiracy to murder, the court saw no justification for continued custody. Consequently, the bail application was allowed, subject to standard conditions and a personal bond of Rs. 50,000.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant's alleged act of striking the witness attracts the provisions of Section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the nature and seriousness of the alleged injury warrant denial of bail.
- Whether the completion of investigation and filing of charge‑sheet justify release on bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- simple injury
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 352
- Section 109
- Section 115
- Section 3
- political enmity
- criminal procedure
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:44690
901-BA-1630-26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1630 OF 2026
Sachin Madhukar Tayde ..APPLICANT
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT
....
Ms. R.S. Kulkarni a/w Mr. A.R. Kachole, Advocates for applicant
Mr. K.K. Naik, A.P.P. for respondent - State
....
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAONKAR, J.
DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for
State. With the assistance of both the learned counsel I have also perused the
copy of charge-sheet which came to be subsequently filed after the present
application was preferred in this Court.
2. The prosecution story in brief is that the informant, which is also a
farmer, had political enmity with Accused No.1 – Pravin, and therefore, there
used to be regular quarrels between them. On the date of incident, when the
informant was proceeding towards his agricultural field on his motorcycle, at
that time Accused No.1 came on his tractor and tried to side-cut him on the
road. Being annoyed with the said conduct, the informant stopped him and
at that time there was quarrel between both of them. It is alleged that
1 / 5
901-BA-1630-26.odt
Accused No.1 thereafter made a telephonic call and asked Accused Nos. 2 to 4
to reach the spot. Accordingly, other accused persons reached the spot. The
allegations pertain to assault by use of spade on the head of the informant
and while there was scuffle, there was an injury to the head caused by a stick
at the behest of present applicant. The incident dated 06 th June, 2026 has
been reported to the police on 15 th June, 2026. The present applicant came
to be arrested on the same date i.e. on 15th June, 2026 and since then he is in
custody.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that going by the
prosecution story itself the role of the present applicant is very minimal. The
allegation pertains to a single injury caused to the injured witness, who was
accompanying the informant. The assault is alleged to have been caused by a
stick. She refers to the injury certificate of the injured witness – Sunil which
makes a reference that the injury is on the head and describes the same as
simple injury. Admittedly, there are no allegations against the present
applicant that he has assaulted the informant with whom the alleged incident
has actually started. There is also no allegation against the present applicant
that he assaulted to the informant and participated in any quarrel, though
there are allegations pertaining to assault by fist and blow. She argues that
there is no intention and the ingredients of Section 307 of the B.N.S. are
absolutely not attracted. Taking into consideration the period undergone, she
prays that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail.
2 / 5
901-BA-1630-26.odt
4. Learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the application by stating that
the role is specifically assigned to the present applicant. The allegation of
assault on the head of injured witness – Sunil is also specifically attributed to
the present applicant. Head being a vital part of the body, intention will have
to be inferred from the manner in which the assault has been caused. He
further argues that although the accused persons had reached the spot with
preparation, the present applicant was carrying stick alongwith him. He also
argued that anticipatory bail applications of the co-accused persons are
pending, and therefore, releasing of present applicant at this stage will affect
further investigation, which is required to be carried out as far as Accused
No.1 is concerned. He, thus prays that application be rejected.
5. I have perused the entire charge-sheet. No doubt, the allegations
leveled against the present applicant and against the co-accused persons are
specific and all other accused persons have been named in the F.I.R. Even
though the role that has been attributed to the present applicant if taken into
consideration, case of the prosecution is to the extent of one single blow of
stick on the head of the injured – Sunil. Taking cue from the prosecution
story itself, the injury certificate which is annexed to the charge-sheet also
suggests that there is an injury on the head. However, the same is of simple
nature. The prosecution has not brought all material on record to suggest
that accused persons have conspired together and with an intention had
reached the spot to commit murder of the informant – Samadhan. The entire
3 / 5
901-BA-1630-26.odt
allegations of the prosecution story are mainly against Accused No.1, who
assaulted the informant with whom he had political enmity.
6. Taking into consideration the role attributed to the present
applicant and the nature of injury i.e. caused to the injured witness at the
instance of present applicant and furthermore that the investigation is
complete and the charge-sheet has also been filed, I do not find any reason to
continue custody of the present applicant. In the above circumstances, the
application stands allowed. Hence the following order :-
ORDER
(i) The Bail Application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No. 233 of
2026 registered with Yaval Police Station, District Jalgaon,
for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115(2),
3(5) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on
furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand only) with one or two solvent surety in the like
amount, subject to the following conditions :
a) The applicant shall attend the trial Court on every date
fixed, unless his attendance is specifically exempted.
b) 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.
4 / 5
901-BA-1630-26.odt
c) The applicant shall furnish his current residential
address and mobile number to the Investigating Officer
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.
d) The applicant shall not leave India without prior
permission of the trial Court and, if he possesses
passport, shall deposit the same with the trial Court
within seven days of his release.
e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence
of a similar nature while on bail.
f) Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the
prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail.
(iii) All observations in this order are prima facie and confined to
the decision of this bail application. The trial Court shall
decide the case on the evidence led before it.
(iv) The Bail Application is disposed of in the above terms.
( HITEN S. VENEGAONKAR, J. )
SSD
5 / 5
Checking your session…