ABA No. 297 of 2026 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
(ii)The application is allowed in the above terms and standsdisposed of
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 3(5), 109, 118(1), 118(2), 126(2), 352
Key paragraphs
- Para 55.I have gone through the investigation papers made available by the learned APP which has now culminated into filing of thecharge-sheet against the arrested accused before the learned trialCourt. The perusal of the documents shows that there are criminal antecedents, inasmuch as the family members…
Judgment
1 902.ABA-297-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABADANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 297 OF 2026PRITAM ATTARSING KHANDAGALE (PARDESHI)VERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA WITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1555 OF 2026 IN ABA/297/2026… Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Ade Ravindra B. APP for Respondents/State : Mr. P. D. Patil… CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.DATE :6th MAY 2026PER COURT :
Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicant and the learned APP for the State.
The Applicant has approached this Court, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.313/2025 registered with Paithan Police Station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar(Rural) for the offences punishable under Section 352, 3(5), 126(2),118(2), 118(1), 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The learned Counsel for the Applicant Mr. Ade submits that the Applicant is falsely implicated in the present crime. There is along history of lodging FIRs against each other by the Complainant’sfamily and the Applicant’s family. FIR No. 308/2023 was filed by the 2 902.ABA-297-2026.doc wife of the Applicant against the Complainant/Yash, and his family members. FIR No. 255/2025 was filed by Adarsh, son of the Applicant, against Yash and his family members. FIR No. 510/2025was filed by Soni Pardeshi against the family members of Yash, the Complainant. On the other hand, the Complainant and his father filed FIR Nos. 306/2023 and 264/2025 against the Pardeshi family. In the present FIR also, the entire Pardeshi family, including Pritam, has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that two co-accused, namely Adarsh (son of the Applicant) and Krish, were arrested and subsequently released on regular bail on 20.01.2026,upon recording the fact that the matter had been amicably resolved between the Complainant and the Applicant. A copy of the order dated 20.01.2026 passed by this Court in BA No. 2454/2025 isplaced on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification. TheComplainant has also filed an affidavit dated 30.04.2026 confirming that the matter has been amicably resolved due to the intervention of reputed and elder persons of the village, with a view to permanently settle the dispute. Except for the aforesaid offences lodged against each other by the Complainant and the Applicant’s family, there are no other criminal antecedents of the Applicant. The earlier application filed by the Applicant for grant of anticipatory bail came to be withdrawn, as this Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail vide order dated 17.11.2025 passed in ABA No. 1837/2025.However, as there is change in circumstances, due to settlement arrived at between the Complainant and the Applicant, and on the basis of which the other two arrested co-accused were released by 3 902.ABA-297-2026.doc this Court, the present successive bail application is filed for grant of anticipatory bail.
As against this, the learned APP strongly opposes the present application on the ground that the earlier application came tobe withdrawn, as this Court was not inclined to grant relief videorder dated 17.11.2025 passed in ABA No. 1837/2025. There aredirect allegations against the present Applicant of having assaulted the Complainant by means of an iron rod. The injuries sustained by the Complainant corroborate these allegations. The injury on the head clearly indicates an assault by a hard object. The said injury is grievous in nature, and hence the offence under Section 118(2) BNSis clearly made out. The offence is punishable with life imprisonment. Hence this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.
I have gone through the investigation papers made available by the learned APP which has now culminated into filing of thecharge-sheet against the arrested accused before the learned trialCourt. The perusal of the documents shows that there are criminal antecedents, inasmuch as the family members of the Complainant aswell as the Applicant have filed several offences against each other since 2023. There are allegations of assault against other co-accusedwho were already arrested and released on bail. The submission of the learned Counsel for the Applicant, that the Applicant is falsely roped in the present crime, appears to be probable at this stage, as there are several such criminal antecedents between the two families. 4 902.ABA-297-2026.doc However these observations are prima facie in nature and the same shall not influence the trial Court..Taking into consideration the fact that the other arrested co-accused are already released on regular bail upon recording acompromise arrived at between the families of the Complainant and the Applicant, and also the fact that the Complainant has filed an affidavit before this Court confirming that the matter is amicably resolved, I am inclined to protect the Applicant.
Operative part
Hence the following order :ORDER(i)In the event of arrest of the Applicant - Pritam AttarsingKhandagale (Pardeshi) in connection with Crime No.313/2025registered with Paithan Police Station, District ChhatrapatiSambhajinagar (Rural) for the offences punishable under Section352, 3(5), 126(2), 118(2), 118(1), 109 of the Bharatiya NyayaSanhita, 2023, he be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond ofRs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two solvent sureties in the like amount, on the following conditions :
(a)The Applicant shall attend Paithan Police Station, DistrictChhatrapati Sambhajinagar (Rural) on every Sunday between 11:00am. to 01:00 pm. and thereafter as when called by the InvestigatingOfficer, till filing of the supplementary charge-sheet if any, against the Applicant.
(b)The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not influence the witnesses. 5 902.ABA-297-2026.doc (c)The Applicant shall submit his Aadhar and PAN Cards to the Investigating Officer and detailed addresses and phone numbers of himself and two of the near relatives.
(d)A single violation of the conditions would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of the bail.
(ii)The application is allowed in the above terms and stands disposed of.
(iii)The Criminal Application is also disposed of. MEHROZ K. PATHAN JUDGENAJEEB..
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: (ii)The application is allowed in the above terms and standsdisposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 3(5), 109, 118(1), 118(2), 126(2), 352.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.