Bombay High Court

ATISH SANTOSH GARUDKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 22 July 2026
Disposal: Allowed
Bench: ASHWIN D BHOBE

Holding

The Court held that, in the absence of any material indicating the applicant’s participation and given the parity with co‑accused already released on bail, the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS.

Summary

The applicant, accused No. 4 in a murder‑related case (Crime No. 646 of 2024), was arrested on 28 January 2025 and his earlier bail application was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge. He filed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, contending that he is named only in the FIR, that witnesses merely place him at the scene, and that there is no material showing his participation. The State argued that the applicant’s presence was noted but agreed that no substantive evidence linked him to the offence. The Court observed that other accused (Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7) facing identical charges had already been released on bail and that no distinguishing facts existed against the applicant. Applying the parity principle and noting the applicant’s clean criminal record, the Court held that he was entitled to bail. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to standard conditions and a surety bond.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS despite being named in the FIR.
Whether the principle of parity with co‑accused already released on bail warrants granting bail to the applicant.
Whether the absence of material evidence of the applicant’s participation justifies bail.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 25, 4
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 61(2)

Subjects

regular bail
parity principle
criminal procedure
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Arms Act
no antecedents
bail conditions

Judgment

902-BA-1902-2026.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1902 OF 2026

Atish Santosh Garudkar ... Applicant.
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent.
_______________________________________________________________
Mr. Vivek Arote a/w Mr. Akshay Dingale & Mr. Harish Arote, Advocate
for the Applicant.
Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, APP for Respondent/State.
_______________________________________________________________

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

DATE : 22nd July, 2026.

P.C. :

1. Heard, Mr Vivek Arote, learned Advocate for the Applicant and

Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, learned APP for the State.

2. By the present Application filed under Section 483 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS” for short), the

Applicant seeks Regular Bail in Crime No. 646 of 2024 registered with

the Baramati City Police Station, Taluka Baramati, for offences

punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 189(2), 189(4), 191(2),

191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under

Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act. The Crime No. 646 of

2024 is registered as Sessions Case No. 102 of 2025 and is pending

Vivekanand 1
902-BA-1902-2026.doc

before the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati.

3. Mr. Vivek Arote, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that

there are 10 accused in the present crime. Applicant is Accused No. 4.

He states that Crime No. 646 of 2024 is registered as Sessions Case No.

102 of 2025 and is pending before the Additional Sessions Judge,

Baramati.

4. The case of the prosecution is that on account of previous enmity,

there was a clash between two groups, which resulted in the death of

Ganesh Waghmode.

5. Applicant was arrested on 28.01.2025. Criminal Bail Application

at Exhibit 58 in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2025 filed by the Applicant

was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, by order

dated 15.04.2026.

6. Mr. Vivek Arote, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submits that

although the Applicant is named in the FIR, there are no allegations of

the involvement of the Applicant in the charge-sheet. He submits that

Accused Nos. 1, 5, 6 and 7 with similar allegations have been released

on bail by this Court (Exh. B, page Nos. 316 to 333 of the paper book).

He, therefore, seeks bail on the ground of parity. He submits that the
Vivekanand 2
902-BA-1902-2026.doc

Applicant has no criminal antecedents.

7. Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, learned APP for the State, submits that

the Applicant is named in the FIR and that some of the witnesses have

also stated that the Applicant was present at the scene of the offence.

However, in all fairness, he submits that there is no material to indicate

the Applicant's participation in the crime.

8. Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, learned APP for the Respondent-State,

does not dispute the contentions of Mr. Vivek Arote that the allegations

against the Applicant in the present crime are similar and identical to

those against Jayesh Babasaheb Mane (Accused No. 1), Somnath

Rangnath Yadav (Accused No. 5), Bhoya @ Kishore Bapu Bhise

(Accused No. 6) and Bandu Bhiva Kale (Accused No. 7).

9. Perused the records with the assistance of learned Advocates of

the parties.

10. A perusal of the charge-sheet reveals that although the

Applicant's name is mentioned in the FIR and some witnesses have

referred to the Applicant's presence at the scene of offence, there is no

overt act indicating the Applicant's involvement in the present crime.

Vivekanand 3
902-BA-1902-2026.doc

11. Accused Nos. 1, 5, 6 and 7 in Crime No. 646 of 2024, on similar

and identical allegations, have been released on bail. There is no

material placed on record to demonstrate any distinguishing

circumstances that would warrant a different view in the case of the

Applicant.

12. Mr. Vivek Arote, learned Advocate for the Applicant, would be

justified in seeking bail on the ground of parity.

13. The Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents as

submitted by Mr. Vivek Arote, learned Advocate for the Applicant.

14. In view of the above, the Applicant is entitled to bail, on the

following conditions:-

(a) Applicant is directed to be released on bail in
connection with Crime No. 646 of 2024, registered with
Baramati Police Station, Baramati, upon furnishing a P.R. Bond
in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each, with one or two sureties in the
like amount, to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions
Judge, Baramati.

(b) Applicant shall attend and report before the
Investigation Officer, Baramati City Police Station, Taluka
Baramati once in a month i.e. on the first Saturday of each
month from 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 p.m., untill further orders.
Vivekanand 4
902-BA-1902-2026.doc

(c) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts
to the Court or any police officer and should not tamper with
evidence.

(d) Applicant shall attend and regularly appear before the
Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati in Sessions Case No.102
of 2025 on each date fixed in the matter, unless exempted
specifically by the Court.

(e) Applicant upon his release, within 3 days shall furnish
to the Investigating Officer, Baramati Police Station, Baramati,
his residential addresses with proof and the contact numbers
and to keep the Investigation Officer intimated about the
change in the same from time to time.

15. Criminal Bail Application No. 1902 of 2026 is allowed in the
above said terms.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Digitally
signed by
VIVEKANAND
VIVEKANAND RAJENDRA
RAJENDRA BONDE
BONDE Date:
2026.07.22
20:42:12
+0530

Vivekanand 5

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…