Bombay High Court
BHUSHAN @ SWAPNIL SUNIL GOSAVIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail on the principle of parity with the co‑accused.
Summary
The applicant, Bhushan @ Swapnil Sunil Gosavi, sought regular bail for offences under IPC Sections 310(2) and 311 arising from a dacoity on 23 November 2024. He had been in custody for more than one year and four months, while a co‑accused facing similar charges had already been released on bail. The prosecution argued that the applicant was caught red‑handed, the weapon was recovered, he had antecedents and might abscond or tamper with witnesses. The Court considered the principle of parity with the co‑accused and the length of pre‑trial detention. It granted bail on a personal bond of Rs 30,000 with sureties, imposing conditions to attend police, not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, and ordered the application disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the seriousness of IPC Sections 310(2) and 311 and the prosecution’s claim of risk of absconding and witness tampering
- Whether the principle of parity with a co‑accused released on bail warrants granting bail to the applicant
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 310(2), 311
Subjects
- bail
- IPC Section 310
- IPC Section 311
- dacoity
- parity principle
- pre‑trial detention
- witness tampering
- antecedents
Judgment
8-BA-98-2026.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 98 OF 2026
Bhushan @ Swapnil Sunil Gosavi … Applicant/s
Versus
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent/s
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Akshay Bankapur, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. S. S. Pednekar, APP for Respondent-State. 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. 428 of 2024 registered with Upanagar Police Station, District -
Nashik, for the offences punishable under Section 310(2) and 311 of the
Indian Penal Code 1860.
2. It is prosecution’s case that on 23rd November 2024, the
applicant and co-accused were arrested by the police when they were
running away after committing dacoity.
3. It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant is behind bars for more than 1 year and 4 months. There is no
Digitally
signed by recovery of robbed amount at the instance of the applicant. The co-
SHUBHADA
SHUBHADA SHANKAR
SHANKAR KADAM
KADAM Date:
accused, against whom similar allegations are made, has been released on
2026.03.06
11:08:02
+0530
bail. Hence, requested to allow the application.
Page 1 of 3
8-BA-98-2026.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
4. It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was caught
red-handed on the spot by the police. The pistol used in the crime has been
recovered at his instance. The applicant has antecedents. 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 applicant is behind bars for more than
1 year and 4 months. The co-accused, against whom similar allegations are
made, has been released on bail. Hence, the applicant is entitled to bail on
the principle of parity. Considering these facts, I pass following order :
ORDER
(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 428 of 2024
registered with Upanagar Police Station, District - Nashik, 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
8-BA-98-2026.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…