CRI. BA 962/2024
1
ORDER
MHCC020061362024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 962 OF 2024
( CNR NO.: MHCC02-006136-2024 )
Shubham Santosh Ghadge
aged 23 years
Pandav Kund, 2, Shriram Nivas,
Nardas Nagar, Tembi Pada, Bhandup
Mumbai 400078
(presently lodged at Arthur Road
Central Jail, Mumbai)
V/s.

…Applicant/Accused No.3
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Bhandup
Police Station vide C.R.No.195/2024)
…Respondent/State.

Appearance:Ld. Advocate Sukrut Mhatre for the applicant/accused.
Ld. S. P.P. S.V. Kekanis and Ld. S.P.P Manisha J. Parmar for the
State/respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
S.M. TAPKIRE (C.R.60)
DATE : 29.04.2024.
ORDER
1.

This is an application under Section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C) in
CRI. BA 962/2024
2
ORDER
connection with the crime vide C.R. No.195 of 2024 dated 27.03.2024
registered with respondent/state for the offences punishable under
Sections 326, 324, 323, 504 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.
2.
of
The respondent/state has strongly opposed to the bail plea
the
applicant on various
grounds
by
filing
their
written
say/submission at Exh–3.
3.

Perused the application, plea submissions, grounds raised
therein coupled with the documents placed reliance by the applicant.
Also, perused the written say/objection of respondent/state. Heard Ld.
Advocate for the applicant and the Ld. S.P.P. for respondent/state.
4.

Having heard to the rival parties and considered their
raised submissions contentions and record availed prima-facie inclined
in impugned crime the applicant and two co-accused are involved. They
all are arrested. Against them the informant/victim Sushil Vinod Rai has
raised the allegations that on 25.03.2024 at 01:30 p.m. when he was
proceeding towards his residence, while it the accused obstructed to
him, stopped him and started teasing with him. Upon given
understanding to them they annoyed and raised attack by a paverblock. While it the accused no.1 Tushar Mahadeshwar delivered a blow
by said paver-block on his left eye. Further, the accused no.2 Gokul
Bhadait also delivered a blow by the same paver block on his head.
Therefore, he severely got injured. Against the applicant alleged that he
was companion of co-accused and by abusing him assaulted by fist
blows and kicks. The applicant has denied the entire allegations and
CRI. BA 962/2024
3
ORDER
raised the plea of false implication. As well as against him no any
serious in natures allegations raised. He is immediately arrested after
raising of the impugned crime.
5.

Whilst the respondent/state has strongly opposed to the
bail plea of applicant by raising objections that the applicant was
actively involved in the alleged crime. He was companion of main
accused. As well as strong possibility of abscondance. Thus, considering
the same prima-facie inclined with regard to the impugned crime dated
25.03.2024, the present FIR is raised on 27.03.2024. Wherein
substantial material allegations are raised only against the co-accused
Gokul and Tushar. Against the applicant merely raised the plea and
grievance that he was accompanied with co-accused and by abusing
assaulted to informant by fist blows and kicks. Except that nothing
serious raised against him. The bail plea of applicant is pleased to
rejected by Ld. Trial Court merely on the ground prescribed severe in
natures punishment to the offence u/s. 326 of the IPC. However, I felt in
such eventualities by saddling certain conditions would appropriate to
have the relief sought by the applicant. With this passed the following
order.
:ORDER:
1.

The present Criminal Bail Application No. 962 of 2024 is hereby
allowed, subject to following conditions by the applicant/accused.
a.

The applicant Shubham Santosh Ghadge, age 23 years, residing
at Pandav Kund, 2, Shriram Nivas, Nardas Nagar, Tembi Pada, Bhandup
CRI. BA 962/2024
4
ORDER
Mumbai 400 078 be released on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) and furnish one or two sureties in the
like amount in connection with the crime vide C.R. No.195 of 2024
registered with Bhandup Police Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 326, 324, 323, 504 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860.
b.

The applicant shall not tamper or hamper the prosecution
witnesses and evidence by any manner.
c.

The
applicant
shall
record
his
attendance
with
respondent/Bhandup Police Station on every Friday of every week
between 11:00 a.m. to 05:00 p.m. until submission of charge-sheet.
d.

The applicant shall attend every date of trial without fail.

e.

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.

f.

The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of
Ld. Trial Court.
g.

The applicant shall submit his proper considerable residential
address proof as well as telephone and cell numbers with respondent, in
view of his contact.
h.

The applicant to make surety compliance before Ld. Trial Court.

i.

Accordingly, inform to the Ld. Trial Court, Investigating
CRI. BA 962/2024
5
ORDER
Officer/Bhandup Police Station by sending copy of this order.
j.

The respondent/Bhandup Police Station to take note of this order.

k.

The present Criminal Bail Application No.962 of 2024 stands
disposed of accordingly.
Dictated and pronounced in open court
SHRIRAM
MADHUKAR
TAPKIRE
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Date of sign
: 29.04.2024
: 30.04.2024
: 02.05.2024
Digitally signed
by SHRIRAM
MADHUKAR
TAPKIRE
Date:
2024.05.03
13:16:00 +0530
(S.M. Tapkire)
Addl. Sessions Judge
Sessions Court,
Mumbai. C.R. 60
CRI. BA 962/2024
6
ORDER
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
03/05/2024, 1.15 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
Mr. Prasad S. Pednekar
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court Room No.)

HHJ S.M. Tapkire,(C.R.No.60)
Addl. Sessions Judge.,City Civil & Sessions
Court, Mumbai.

Date of pronouncement of Judgment/Order
29.04.2024
Order signed by P.O. on
02.05.2024
Order uploaded on
03.05.2024