Bombay High Court
JANKU BAPURAO YELE AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicants on the basis of prima facie observations indicating no substantial risk of flight, tampering with evidence, or threat to public order.
Summary
The applicants, Janku Bapurao Yele and Vivak Janku Yele, were arrested in connection with a FIR (CR No. 485 of 2026) arising from a family land dispute that resulted in injuries to the complainant, a relative. The FIR listed multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including sections relating to assault, criminal intimidation and offences against the human body. The primary issue before the court was whether bail should be granted despite the seriousness of the charges and the familial nature of the conflict. The court observed that both parties had a history of mutual complaints, that the injuries were largely simple, and that the applicants were cooperating towards reconciliation, indicating a low risk of flight or tampering. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to stringent conditions, including a personal bond, reporting requirements, and prohibitions on influencing witnesses. The order expressly limited its observations to bail and made no determination on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving multiple serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita arising from a family land dispute
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115, 118, 126, 189, 190, 191, 351, 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- family dispute
- land dispute
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- prima facie
- personal bond
- reporting conditions
Judgment
9. BA 3621-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3621 OF 2026
1. Janku Bapurao Yele .Applicants
2. Vivak Janku Yele
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra .Respondent
Digitally
signed by
Mr. Amit Sale a/w. Mr. Vaibhav Ugle, Advocates, for the Applicants
ANAND Mr. Y. M. Nakhwa, APP, for the Respondent – State
ANAND SUDHAKAR
SUDHAKAR SUDAME
SUDAME Date:
Mr. Abhishek Ulhas Arote, Advocate, for Respondent No.2/Complainant
2026.09.29
15:07:53
+0530
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : 28.09.2026
P. C.
1. Heard Mr. Sale, learned Counsel for the Applicants, Mr. Nakhwa,
learned APP for the Respondent – State and Mr. Arote, learned Counsel
for the Complainant.
2. This Application is filed in connection with C.R.No. 485 of 2026
registered with Shirur Police Station, Pune for offences punishable
under Sections 109, 118(2), 118(1), 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 189(4),
190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 351(3) & 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”).
3. The Applicants are arraigned as Accused Nos. 2 & 4. The
Applicants and the injured Victim, who is the Complainant are all
family members belonging to the same family. There is a land dispute
Anand 1 of 5
9. BA 3621-2026.doc
amongst them with regard to determination and entitlement of share
as also vahivat. The record which is placed before me to which Mr. Sale
has referred to prima facie shows that there are several past incidents
in the form of crimes registered qua and against both the parties by
either of the parties and it is for the same cause of action. Just one
month prior to the present incident in question which took place on
25.05.2026, there was a crime registered against both the parties
before me emanating and arising out of the same cause of action. It is
seen that in the present case, FIR is lodged after a hiatus of three days
especially when it is the case of the prosecution that the Complainant’s
brother was grievously injured. The Injury Certificates are appended at
page Nos. 63 to 65. It prima facie show only one grievous injury,
whereas rest of the injuries are simple. Be that as it may, the motive of
the crime is clear. Though it is argued vehemently by the prosecution
that threats have been administered to eliminate and finish the injured
victim that is bound to happen when tension escalates in family
members and both families suffer and are at the receiving end.
However, considering the nature of the lis and also the fact that parties
from both sides having been involved and have also been injured in the
incident in question, I am inclined to accept the case of the Applicants
for grant of bail. I am also informed that both parties are actively
Anand 2 of 5
9. BA 3621-2026.doc
considering reconciliation of their long standing feud. However, this is
not the reason for grant of bail.
4. Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and finding,
Bail Application of Applicants is allowed subject to the following terms
and conditions:-
(i) Applicants – Janku Bapurao Yele and Vivak Janku Yele
are directed to be immediately released from prison in
connection with CR. No. 485 of 2026;
(ii) Applicants are directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five
Thousand only) each with one surety of the like
amount;
(iii) Applicants shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Shirur 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;
(iv) Applicants shall co-operate with the conduct of the trial
and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates,
unless specifically exempted. Applicants shall not seek
Anand 3 of 5
9. BA 3621-2026.doc
unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall
entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail;
(v) Applicants shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicants shall not influence any of the witnesses or
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicants shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of their current residential addresses and mobile
telephone numbers and shall forthwith inform the
Investigating Officer of any change in their residential
addresses or mobile telephone numbers, 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 Applicants.
5. 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
Anand 4 of 5
9. BA 3621-2026.doc
hereinabove in this order.
6. Bail Applications are allowed and disposed in the above terms.
(MILIND N. JADHAV, J.)
Anand 5 of 5
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.