Bombay High Court
GAURAV DILIP JAGTAPversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail is granted to the applicant under the conditions specified by the court.
Summary
The Bombay High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Gaurav Dilip Jagtap, who had been incarcerated for four years in connection with a procession‑related violent incident. The charges included several serious offences under the Indian Penal Code (sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 427, 188, 120(B)) and Section 4(25) of the Arms Act. The prosecution highlighted the gravity of the injuries and the alleged use of weapons, while the defence emphasised the prolonged delay in trial and lack of a clear delineation of each accused's role. The court noted a Supreme Court order from 30.10.2023 rejecting bail in a similar context but found it not determinative for the present case. Considering the four‑year pre‑trial detention and the absence of imminent trial, the judge granted bail with strict conditions, ordering the applicant’s release upon furnishing a bond.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite the seriousness of the offences charged.
- Whether the delay of four years in trial commencement warrants the grant of bail.
- Whether the Supreme Court order dated 30.10.2023 rejecting bail in a comparable case is binding precedent for the present application.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 4(25)
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 143, 147, 148, 149, 188, 307, 427, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- pre‑trial detention
- IPC offences
- Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- procession violence
- judicial delay
Judgment
13. BA-3512-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3512 OF 2026
Gaurav Dilip Jagtap .. Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Rahul K. Dhaigude, Advocate for Applicant
Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for State
Mr. Om N. Latpate a/w Mr. Jitendra S. Sawant & Mr. Prashant P.
Pathe, Advocates for Intervenor / Complainant
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 21, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Dhaigude, learned Advocate for Applicant; Ms. Phad,
learned APP for State and Mr. Latpate, learned Advocate for Intervenor
/ Complainant.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.
366/2022 registered with Saswad Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 427,
188 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC") and
under Section 4(25) of the Arms Act.
3. The Applicant is indicted along with several other co-accused
persons in the Ganpati Visarjan procession. A scuffle and skirmish took
1 of 5
13. BA-3512-26.odt
place between members of two Mandals with regard to whose
procession would go ahead from the Hundekari Chowk in Saswad.
The President of one Mandal intervened and instructed the victim's
group to go ahead with the procession which was objected to by the
other group. The brother of the President intervened and pacified the
situation but the issue escalated thereafter and it led to a free fight.
4. Case of prosecution is that the accused persons were all armed
and therefore, the injured victim as well as the other victims having
been grievously injured, this Court should consider the gravity and the
egregiousness of the incident in question as well as the injuries which
are caused and deny bail. Applicant has been incarcerated for the past
four years. There is no possibility of the trial commencing and for that
matter concluding on the horizon of the Trial Court in the near
foreseeable future.
5. The injury certificate is appended at Page No. 93 of the
Application. It prima facie suggests six injuries, out of which two are
simple and four are grievous. The role which is attributed to the
Applicant is that he inflicted blows with a cricket bat. Insofar as the
other accused persons are concerned, some of them have been
attributed with having used hard and blunt objects namely sticks and
one accused person has used a sickle.
2 of 5
13. BA-3512-26.odt
6. The precise, defined role of each of the accused persons is not
before the Court, as also the ignominy of the pendency of the trial
compels me to consider the case of the Applicant for grant of bail.
7. The application is vehemently opposed by learned APP as also
learned Advocate for the Complainant. Order dated 30.10.2023
passed by the Supreme Court, copy of which is appended at page 51,
is shown to me to consider rejection of the bail application. I have
perused the said order. In the said order, Supreme Court states that
they did not find it a fit case to grant bail. However the said order is
passed by the Supreme Court three years ago.
8. The Applicant has approached this Court after a humongous
period of four years from the date of the incident and there is
absolutely no progress in trial. In that view of the matter, considering
the reasons for long incarceration of the Applicant and also for the
aforesaid reasons, I am inclined to allow the present Application.
Hence, Applicant is released on bail on the following terms and
conditions:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with C.R. No. 366/2022;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five
3 of 5
13. BA-3512-26.odt
Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the like
amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Saswad Police Station, once every month on the first
Sunday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00
p.m.;
(iv) Applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Saswad
Police Station except for attending the Police Station
and trial;
(v) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and
attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically
exempted and will not take any unnecessary
adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the
prosecution to apply for revocation of this order;
(vi) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vii) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(viii)Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of his current address and mobile contact number and /
or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from
time to time, as applicable; and
4 of 5
13. BA-3512-26.odt
(ix) Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation
of bail granted to the Applicant.
9. Needless to state that the above observations will not come in
the way of trial as they are prima facie in nature based on the
submissions made and the material placed before this Court.
10. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
MOHAN AMBERKAR
AMBERKAR Date:
2026.09.21
20:14:41 +0530
5 of 5
Checking your session…