Bombay High Court

SANDIP RAMESH GANGURDEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 5 October 2026
Disposal: Allowed

Holding

Bail is granted to the applicant subject to the conditions imposed by the court.

Summary

The Bombay High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Sandip Ramesh Gangurde, who is one of fifteen accused in a case involving serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, the Arms Act and the Maharashtra Police Act. The prosecution alleged that the applicant was present during a violent incident at Aura Bar and Restaurant where a victim was stabbed and shot, but there was no direct evidence linking him to the assault. The applicant had been in custody for a year, had two prior antecedents (one acquitted, one pending), and is the sole breadwinner for a family including a disabled sister and mother. The court noted that other accused had been released on bail and that the applicant’s personal circumstances warranted consideration of parity. After evaluating the lack of direct evidence and the applicant’s family responsibilities, the court granted bail subject to strict conditions, without commenting on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the applicant despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under multiple statutes.
Whether the applicant’s lack of direct evidence and family circumstances justify bail.
Whether charges under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 can be applied to the applicant.

Legislation cited

Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25, 3
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 189(2)(4), 190, 212, 228, 238(K)(B), 308(2)(4), 324(4)(5), 351(2)(3), 61(2)
Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 — s. 12, 3, 7
Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 — s. 23(2)
Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 — s. 135

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
organized crime
arms offence
Maharashtra police
family circumstances
prima facie evidence

Judgment

24.BA.3606.2026.doc

HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BAIL APPLICATION NO.3606 OF 2026

Sandip Ramesh Gangurde .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
 Mr. Akshay Bankapur, Advocates for Applicant.
 Ms. Anuja S. Gotad, APP for Respondent.
 PSI – Rahul Nalkande, Satpur Police Station, Nashik.
...................

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : OCTOBER 05, 2026
P.C.:

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

Ms. Gotad, learned APP for Respondent.

2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R.

No.313 of 2025 registered with Satpur Police Station, Nashik for

offences punishable under Sections 109, 308(2)(4), 324(4)(5), 351(2)

(3), 190, 61(2), 189(2)(4), 212, 228, 238(K)(B) of the Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Sections 3, 7 and 12 of the Criminal Law

(Amendment) Act, 2013; Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and

Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

3. The Applicant is one of the 15 Accused persons in the

present crime. Prima facie, it is seen that he is arrested as Accused

1 of 5
24.BA.3606.2026.doc

No.10 but not named in the First Information Report (for short ‘FIR’).

Neither there is any seizure from him. He is incarcerated for the past

one year in jail. The permission to apply charges under Maharashtra

Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (for short ‘MCOC Act’) under

Section 23(2) against the Applicant has been rejected.

4. The case of the prosecution qua the present Applicant is that

he was present during the incident in question. In so far as the incident

in question is concerned, the principal accused person and his

henchmen who are the other accused persons provided protection to

the running of the business of Aura Bar and Restaurant and had visited

the said place for collecting their dues. During one such collection

drive on 05.10.2025, a quarrel occurred in the restaurant which led to

the incident in question whereby the injured victim was stabbed on the

thigh by one of the Accused persons and the principal Accused person

fired a gunshot on the other thigh of the injured victim.

5. Accused Nos.11 to 14 have all been released on bail. Their

orders are appended at page Nos.2154 of the Application. In so far as

the present Applicant is concerned, he has two antecedents in respect

of which for in one antecedent he has been acquitted and one is

pending.

6. Prima facie, there is no direct evidence of the Applicant

having assaulted the injured victim. The Applicant is having a family

2 of 5
24.BA.3606.2026.doc

and a disabled sister and mother to whom he is required to provide

care and support and he is the only bread earner in the family.

7. In that view of the matter, Mr. Bankapur has persuaded the

Court to consider parity for the Applicant qua his role in the present

crime and allow the Application.

8. After perusing the record of the case, it is prima facie seen

that what Mr. Bankapur has argued appears to be correct.

9. In that view of the matter, case of Applicant is considered for

bail.

10. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant has made out case

for grant of bail subject to following conditions:-

(i) Applicant - Sandip Ramesh Gangurdeis directed

to be immediately released from prison in

connection with Crime No. 313 of 2025;

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

furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen

Thousand only) with one or two surety / sureties

of the like amount;

(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer

at Satpur Police Station, once every month on the

3 of 5
24.BA.3606.2026.doc

first Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to

12:00 p.m.;

(iv) 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;

(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 address and mobile

contact number and / or change of residence or

mobile details, if any, from time to time, as

applicable; and

(viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail

cancellation of bail granted to the Applicant.

11. 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

4 of 5
24.BA.3606.2026.doc

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.

12. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above

terms.

H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Digitally signed
HARSHADA by HARSHADA
HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date: 2026.10.05
15:13:40 +0530

5 of 5

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.