Bombay High Court
BANDU BHIVA KALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail on the principle of parity, subject to a bond and conditions.
Summary
Bandu Bhiva Kale applied for regular bail in a murder case (Crime No.646 of 2024) involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Indian Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that Kale and co‑accused murdered the deceased over an old dispute. Kale’s counsel argued that other co‑accused had already been released on bail, invoking the principle of parity. The State contended that parity should not apply because Kale actively participated in the murder and could abscond or influence witnesses. After hearing both sides and reviewing the charge sheet, the Court held that parity applied and granted bail on a bond of Rs.30,000 with sureties, imposing conditions not to tamper with evidence or contact witnesses. The order clarified that the trial court will decide the case on its merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite alleged participation in murder.
- Whether the principle of parity applies when co‑accused in the same case have been released on bail.
- Whether the risk of absconding or influencing witnesses justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 4(25)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- parity
- murder
- criminal procedure
- Indian Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- witness tampering
- surety bond
Judgment
45-BA-431-2026.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 431 OF 2026
Bandu Bhiva Kale ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Vivek Arote along with Mr. Akshay Dingale, Advocate for the
Applicant.
Ms. Mahalaxmi Ganapathy, APP for Respondent-State.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026.
P.C. :
1. By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in
Crime No.646 of 2024 registered with Baramati Police Station, District
Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2),
189(2),189(4), 191(2), 191(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and Section 4(25) of Indian Arms Act.
2. It is prosecution’s case that the applicant and co-accused
murdered the deceased on the ground of old dispute.
3. It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that
co-accused Jayesh Mane, Somnath Yadav and Bhoya @ Kishore Bhise,
against whom similar allegations have been leveled, are released on bail,
Digitally
signed by
SHUBHADA hence, the applicant is entitled to bail on the principle of parity and
SHUBHADA SHANKAR
SHANKAR KADAM
KADAM Date:
2026.03.06
18:30:48
requested to allow the application.
+0530
Page 1 of 3
45-BA-431-2026.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
4. It is contention of learned APP that parity will not be applicable
as the applicant actively participated in committing murder of the
deceased. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten
the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.
5. I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge sheet and
documents produced on record. The co-accused, against whom similar
allegations have been made, are released on bail. Hence, the applicant is
entitled to bail on the principle of parity and I pass the following order:
ORDER
(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.646 of 2024
registered with Baramati Police Station, District Pune, on
executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two
sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and
when required.
(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to
influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person
concerned with the case.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
Page 2 of 3
45-BA-431-2026.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
6. It is made clear that the above observations are made only for
the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its
own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations
made in this order.
7. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…