2026:BHC-AUG:23705 1 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 959 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1024 OF 2026 1. Sudhakar @ Sudam Baburao Padule, 2. Kamalesh Sopan Borwade, 3. Pradip Sandipan Sonawane, 4. Santosh Vitthalrao Patil (Gund). … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent ... Mr. Mayur Vasant Salunke, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. K. K. Naik, APP for Respondent-State. ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 17th JUNE, 2026 P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. Mayur Vasant Salunke for the Applicants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. K. K. Naik for the respondent–State. 2. By the present application, the Applicants seek their release on bail in connection with Crime No.83 of 2026 dated 26.03.2026, registered with Pimpalner Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 3 and 7 of the 2 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026 Criminal Law Amendment Act.

3. The brief story of prosecution is that, the Informant demanded information pertaining to the group gram panchayat through RTI and out of prevailing enmity between two rival political groups in the village, a tussle took place between the Informant and the present Applicants, whereby the Informant sustained fracture injury on his leg, hand, back and head with the help of iron rod and wooden stick. 4. Mr. Salunke, learned counsel for the Applicants submits that the incident arose out of a clash between two rival groups. He submits that the investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. The custodial presence of the Applicants is no longer necessary. Learned counsel for the Applicants submits that recoveries have already been effected from the present Applicants. He, therefore, prays for allowing the present bail application. 5. Learned APP strongly opposed the application by contending that serious allegations have been levelled against the Applicants. He submits that cross cases have been registered against both groups. According to him, if the Applicants are released on bail, there is every possibility of their indulging in similar activities, thereby creating a law and order problem. He further submits that certain weapons are yet to be recovered. Learned APP submits that weapons are yet to be 3 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026

recovered from the absconding accused persons and that some of the accused are still absconding. He further relied upon the medical certificates and submitted that the injured persons sustained grievous injuries. 6. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties. I have perused both the FIRs as well as the investigation papers made available for my consideration. I have also gone through the medical certificates. The injuries suffered by the injured persons include fractures and are, therefore, grievous in nature. However, upon a specific query put to the learned APP as to whether the injured persons are still undergoing treatment, he submitted that they have been discharged from the hospital. Learned counsel for the Applicants also confirms that all the injured persons have been discharged and are presently out of danger. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts, particularly the fact that recoveries have already been effected from the present Applicants, charge-sheet has been filed and that they have been in custody since 01.04.2026, I am of the view that their further detention is not warranted. Hence, I am inclined to allow the application on the following conditions:- O R D E R I. The application is allowed. 4 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026

II. Applicants – Sudhakar @ Sudam Baburao Padule, Kamalesh Sopan Borwade, Pradip Sandipan Sonawane and Santosh Vitthalrao Patil (Gund) be released on bail in connection with Crime No.83 of 2026 dated 26.03.2026, registered with Pimpalner Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 3 and 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount, subject to the following conditions: (a) The Applicants shall not enter village of Pimpalner, District Beed, till conclusion of the trial, except for attending the proceedings before the concerned Court. (b) The Applicants shall attend each and every date fixed by the learned Trial Court, except when specifically exempted by the learned Trial Court, till culmination of the trial. (c) The Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make 5 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026 any inducement, threat or promise to any prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (d) In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, it shall be open for the prosecution or the complainant to approach this Court for cancellation of bail, notwithstanding the fact that this Court has granted bail to the Applicants.

III. Needless to state that the observations made herein are prima facie in nature and confined to the adjudication of the present bail application. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made in this order while deciding the case on its own merits. IV. Bail before the Trial Court. (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) Tauseef

2026:BHC-AUG:23705 1 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 959 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1024 OF 2026 1. Sudhakar @ Sudam Baburao Padule, 2. Kamalesh Sopan Borwade, 3. Pradip Sandipan Sonawane, 4. Santosh Vitthalrao Patil (Gund). … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent ... Mr. Mayur Vasant Salunke, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. K. K. Naik, APP for Respondent-State. ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 17th JUNE, 2026 P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. Mayur Vasant Salunke for the Applicants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. K. K. Naik for the respondent–State. 2. By the present application, the Applicants seek their release on bail in connection with Crime No.83 of 2026 dated 26.03.2026, registered with Pimpalner Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 3 and 7 of the 2 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026 Criminal Law Amendment Act.

3. The brief story of prosecution is that, the Informant demanded information pertaining to the group gram panchayat through RTI and out of prevailing enmity between two rival political groups in the village, a tussle took place between the Informant and the present Applicants, whereby the Informant sustained fracture injury on his leg, hand, back and head with the help of iron rod and wooden stick. 4. Mr. Salunke, learned counsel for the Applicants submits that the incident arose out of a clash between two rival groups. He submits that the investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. The custodial presence of the Applicants is no longer necessary. Learned counsel for the Applicants submits that recoveries have already been effected from the present Applicants. He, therefore, prays for allowing the present bail application. 5. Learned APP strongly opposed the application by contending that serious allegations have been levelled against the Applicants. He submits that cross cases have been registered against both groups. According to him, if the Applicants are released on bail, there is every possibility of their indulging in similar activities, thereby creating a law and order problem. He further submits that certain weapons are yet to be recovered. Learned APP submits that weapons are yet to be 3 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026

recovered from the absconding accused persons and that some of the accused are still absconding. He further relied upon the medical certificates and submitted that the injured persons sustained grievous injuries. 6. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties. I have perused both the FIRs as well as the investigation papers made available for my consideration. I have also gone through the medical certificates. The injuries suffered by the injured persons include fractures and are, therefore, grievous in nature. However, upon a specific query put to the learned APP as to whether the injured persons are still undergoing treatment, he submitted that they have been discharged from the hospital. Learned counsel for the Applicants also confirms that all the injured persons have been discharged and are presently out of danger. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts, particularly the fact that recoveries have already been effected from the present Applicants, charge-sheet has been filed and that they have been in custody since 01.04.2026, I am of the view that their further detention is not warranted. Hence, I am inclined to allow the application on the following conditions:- O R D E R I. The application is allowed. 4 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026

II. Applicants – Sudhakar @ Sudam Baburao Padule, Kamalesh Sopan Borwade, Pradip Sandipan Sonawane and Santosh Vitthalrao Patil (Gund) be released on bail in connection with Crime No.83 of 2026 dated 26.03.2026, registered with Pimpalner Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 324(4), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and Sections 3 and 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount, subject to the following conditions: (a) The Applicants shall not enter village of Pimpalner, District Beed, till conclusion of the trial, except for attending the proceedings before the concerned Court. (b) The Applicants shall attend each and every date fixed by the learned Trial Court, except when specifically exempted by the learned Trial Court, till culmination of the trial. (c) The Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make 5 of 5 959-BA.1024.2026 any inducement, threat or promise to any prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (d) In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, it shall be open for the prosecution or the complainant to approach this Court for cancellation of bail, notwithstanding the fact that this Court has granted bail to the Applicants.

III. Needless to state that the observations made herein are prima facie in nature and confined to the adjudication of the present bail application. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made in this order while deciding the case on its own merits. IV. Bail before the Trial Court. (SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.) Tauseef