ABHISHEKH @ ABHI RAMESH TAMBEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                               24.BA.3566.2026.doc

Ajay

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                      BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3566 OF 2026

       Abhishekh @ Abhi Ramesh Tambe                      .. Applicant
             Versus
       State of Maharashtra                               .. Respondent
                                  ....................
        Mr. Vivek Arote a/w. Mr. Harish Garde, Advocates for Applicant.
        Mr. Sukanta A. Karmakar, APP for Respondent – State.
                                    ......…...........
                                   CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
                                   DATE         : SEPTEMBER 22, 2026.

       P.C.:

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

       Karmakar, learned APP for Respondent – State.


       2.       This is an Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

       Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking bail in

       connection with C.R.No.464 of 2023 registered with Yerwada Police

       Station, District Pune for offences punishable under Sections 307, 323,

       504 and 506 read with 34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for

       short ‘BNS’); Section 4(25) of the Arms Act; Section 37(1) read with

       Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act; Sections 3 and 7 of the

       Criminal Law Amendment Act and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of

       the Maharashtra Control or Organized Crime Act, 1999. The First

       Information Report is filed on 05.07.2023 and Applicant came to be

       arrested on 05.07.2023.

                                                                           1 of 5
                                                        24.BA.3566.2026.doc


3.        The role of Applicant in the present case is prima facie clear

from the prosecution case that he and the other co-accused person

Akshay Navgire had held the injured victim and a blow with the sickle

(dks;rk) having been given by the other co-accused namely Prajwal

Shinde which is explicitly clear.


4.        Mr. Arote draws attention of the Court to the fact that the

other co-accused person Akshay Navgire having a similar role is infact

exonerated and discharged from the crime and Prajwal Shinde who

had actually inflicted the blow with the weapon has been enlarged on

bail. In that view of the matter and the fact that Applicant has been

incarcerated for three years persuades me to consider the Application

for grant of bail on parity and long incarceration.


5.        The learned APP, Mr. Karmarkar has vehemently objected to

the Application being considered for bail and would submit and argue

that notwithstanding the externment order which was passed against

Applicant, he still entered into Pune city and participated in

committing the crime in question and assisting in commission of the

present crime. He would therefore submit that considering his

antecedents, this Court should not grant him bail and allow the

prosecution to file Affidavit-in-Reply. Affidavit-in-Reply is undoubtedly

required to be filed in matters concerning special Acts, however, it is

not ipso facto that in each and every matter on the say of the


                                                                    2 of 5
                                                        24.BA.3566.2026.doc


prosecution, Affidavit-in-Reply can be allowed to be filed. Bail mattes

are not to be treated as a civil matters. It is prima facie seen that

Applicant is incarcerated for more than three years. The trial is yet to

begin. The ignominy of the trial not commencing and also not

concluding in the near foreseeable future is writ large on the face of

record. That itself coupled with the fact that charge has also not been

framed and most importantly the ground of parity persuades me to

consider the case of Applicant for grant of bail. Applicant is therefore

released on bail.


6.        Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and

findings, Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the

following terms and conditions:-


          (i)   Applicant – Abhishekh @ Abhi Ramesh Tambe is

                directed to be immediately released from prison in

                connection with CR. No.464 of 2023;


          (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on

                furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. Thirty

                Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the like

                amount;


          (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at

                Yerwada Police Station, once every month, on the first

                Sunday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

                                                                    3 of 5
                                               24.BA.3566.2026.doc


     until commencement of trial and thereafter shall attend

     all dates of hearing before the Trial Court;


(iv) Applicant shall cooperate with the conduct of the trial

     and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates,

     unless specifically exempted. Applicant shall not seek

     unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall

     entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail;


(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra

     without prior permission of the Trial Court;


(vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or

     tamper with the evidence in any manner;


(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed

     of his current residential address and mobile telephone

     number and shall forthwith inform the Investigating

     Officer of any change in his residential address or

     mobile telephone number, as and when such change

     occurs; and


(viii)Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid

     conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to

     the Applicant.




                                                           4 of 5
                                                                                     24.BA.3566.2026.doc


                              7.        It is clarified that the observations made in this order are

                              limited for the purpose of granting bail only and I have not made any

                              observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on

                              the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being

                              uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made

                              hereinabove in this order.


                              8.        Bail Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms.




                                                                       [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

    Ajay

           Digitally signed
           by AJAY
AJAY       TRAMBAK
TRAMBAK    UGALMUGALE
UGALMUGALE Date:
           2026.09.22
           20:51:46 +0530




                                                                                                 5 of 5