SWAPNIL SHIVAJI CHAUDHARIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                                              7. BA 3618-2026.doc



                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                         BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3618 OF 2026

                      Swapnil Shivaji Chaudhari                         .Applicant

                                   Vs.

                      The State of Maharashtra                          .Respondent
ANAND
SUDHAKAR              Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w. Mr. Priyesh More & Mr. Nawaz Dard i/b.
SUDAME
Digitally signed by
                      Mr. Samay Pawar, Advocates, for the Applicant
ANAND SUDHAKAR
SUDAME                Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP, for the Respondent – State
Date: 2026.09.29
20:10:43 +0530        Mr. B. R. Maye, PSI, Uruli Kanchan Police Station, Pune present

                                          CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

                                          DATE     : 28.09.2026
                      P. C.

                      1.      Heard Mr. Joshi, learned Counsel for the Applicant and

                      Ms. Talhar, learned APP for the Respondent – State.

                      2.      This Application is filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya

                      Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) (in correspondence

                      with Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) in

                      connection with C.R.No. 328 of 2025 registered with Uruli Kanchan

                      Police Station, Pune for offences punishable under Sections 103(1),

                      238, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and

                      Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act.

                      3.      The case of the prosecution qua the Applicant before me is based


                      Anand                             1 of 5
                                                       7. BA 3618-2026.doc

on circumstantial evidence only. The body of the deceased/victim was

found by his brother and therefore, reported to the police of a crime

against unknown persons. After ten days, the Applicant has been

arrested pursuant to lodging the FIR on the ground that there was a

precursor incident between the family members of both the sides. The

witness statements recorded pursuant to the crime in question prima

facie show that prior to the present incident in question, two

non-cognizable complaints were recorded against each other by both

the groups, wherein the Applicant before me was at the receiving end.

There was a dispute with regard to payment of certain amounts for

sugarcane harvesting and cutting which was not paid which escalated

into a fight resulting in the Applicant’s Splendor Motor Cycle and his

animal shed having been set on fire by the father of the deceased. The

case of the prosecution is based on an extra judicial confession, copies

of which are appended at page Nos. 72 & 73 of certain witnesses which

prima facie state that because of the precursor incident, the Applicant

before me had indulged in the present crime.

4.      Learned Prosecutor would otherwise argue that the injuries on

the body of the deceased/victim were from a sharp weapon and there

has been recovery of Skype (Koyta) from the Applicant. Therefore, it

prima facie proves the prosecution case. I refuse to accept the


Anand                            2 of 5
                                                           7. BA 3618-2026.doc

submission at the threshold for considering the Bail Application, since

Koyta is one such tool which is considered to be a necessity in the

household and available in every household in the villages and it is also

used for cutting of sugarcane. So hence merely because recovery of

Koyta has been made, it would not amount to indictment of the

Applicant prima facie. Hence, for the purpose of bail, arguable case is

made out by Mr. Joshi.

5.      In view of above prima facie observations and finding, Bail

Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the following terms and

conditions:-

           (i)   Applicant – Swapnil Shivaji Chaudhari is directed to be

                 immediately released from prison in connection with

                 CR. No. 328 of 2025;


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

                 P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand

                 only) with one surety of the like amount;


           (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at

                 Uruli Kanchan Police Station, Pune, once every month,

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

                 12:00 p.m. until commencement of trial and thereafter

                 shall attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court;
Anand                               3 of 5
                                                           7. BA 3618-2026.doc

           (iv) Applicant shall co-operate 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.


6.      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

Anand                               4 of 5
                                                         7. BA 3618-2026.doc

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.


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




                                                 (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.)




Anand                              5 of 5