1
MHCC020018802024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 271 OF 2024
Sudhir Anand Khandagale @ Dadya
… Applicant/accused
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
(Through of R.C.F. Police Station vide
C.R. No. 684/2023)
… Respondent/State
Appearance :Mr. Atar L.H., Ld. Advocate for Applicant/Accused.
Mr. O.S. Maraskolhe, Ld. APP for the Respondent/State.
CORAM : H. H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
SHRI A.S. SALGAR (C.R. NO.24)
DATED : 9TH FEBRUARY, 2024
(ORAL ORDER)
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
This is an application filed by applicant/accused under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for releasing
him on regular bail in connection with C.R. No.684/2023 registered
with R.C.F. police station for the offence punishable under Sections
307, 341, 109 r/w 34 of I.P.C. r/w Sections 37(1)(A), 135, 142 of
Maharashtra Police Act.

2
2.

The applicant/accused submitted that he has not
committed any crime. He has been falsely implicated in this case.
He is in custody from 24.11.2023 i.e. for 41 days. Investigation is
completed. Applicant/accused is a student. He is ready and willing
to co-operate investigating machinery and willing to furnish local
surety. Hence, applicant/accused prayed for grant of regular bail in
connection with C.R. No.684/2023 registered with R.C.F. police
station.
3.

Investigating officer submitted the say at Exh.02 and
resisted bail application on the ground that if bail is granted to the
applicant/accused, then he will commit illegal act and create
problem of law and situation. Applicant/accused has not cooperated investigating machinery in the investigation. Lastly,
investigating officer prayed for rejection of bail application.
4.

Heard Ld. Adv. Mr. Atar L.H. for the applicant/accused
and Ld. APP Mr. O.S. Maraskolhe for Respondent/State. I have also
heard investigating officer API Kiran Mandhare attached to RCF
police station.
5.

On the basis of report lodged by informant namely
Aakash Babasaheb Londhe, RCF police station registered C.R.
No.684/2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 341,
109 r/w 34 of I.P.C. r/w Sections 37(1)(A), 135, 142 of
Maharashtra Police Act. It is alleged in FIR that on 20/11/2023 at
about 00.00 hours, informant was returning back to his house on
his motor bike. At that time all the accused persons chased the
informant and they stopped the motor bike of the informant at
3
Sahyadri Nagar, Vashinaka, Chembur. Accused-Rahul Katalkar and
accused Dadya Anand Khandagle (applicant) caught hold the
informant and accused Ganesh Khandagale abused the informant
and gave threat to kill him. He also inflicted blow by means of
sharp edged weapon on the head of the informant and attempted to
kill him. The accused Rahul and accused Dadya (applicant) also
assaulted the informant by fist blows. Hence, informant lodged the
report against the accused at RCF police station.
6.

It is to be noted that name of applicant/accused is
mentioned in the first information report. In FIR the only allegation
levelled against applicant/accused that he caught hold the
informant and principal accused Ganesh Khandagale inflicted blow
by sharp edged weapon on the head of the informant and
attempted to kill him. The applicant/accused assaulted informant
by fist blows. Thus, role of applicant/accused in FIR is to the extent
that he assaulted informant by fist blows. Applicant/accused has
not
used
any
weapon.

There
are
no
allegation
against
applicant/accused that he assaulted informant by sickle and
attempted to kill him. Thus, all the allegations of attempt to commit
murder
of
informant
is against
principal accused
Ganesh
Khandagale. Nothing has been recovered at the instance of
applicant/accused. His role is limited one.
7.

In the present case, the investigation of the crime is
completed and charge-sheet has been filed against accused persons.
During course of investigation, investigating officer recorded
statement of witnesses, seized weapon and clothes. However, no
any weapon has been recovered from the applicant/accused.

4
Moreover, informant/injured is already discharged from the
hospital. Statement of informant/injured is already recorded by Ld.
Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr. P.C. and there is
no question of tampering of prosecution witnesses.
8.

In present case from the FIR as well as charge-sheet it
appears that all the allegation of assault to the complainant by
deadly weapon is against principal accused Ganesh Khandagale.
Only role attributed to the applicant/accused is that he assaulted
informant by fist and kick blows. There is no allegation against
applicant/accused that he attempted to kill informant. His role is
very limited one. Moreover, he is ready to abide by terms and
conditions imposed by the Court. In my view by imposing
conditions applicant/accused should be released on bail.
9.

Applicant/accused is in jail from 23.11.2023. No
purpose will be served by keeping him behind bar. It will take time
to commence hearing of the case. He is permanent resident of
Mumbai. He will not abscond. There are no criminal antecedent
against applicant/accused. Therefore, he is entitled for released on
regular bail.
10.
the
Considering the nature of offence and role played by
applicant/accused
in
crime,
I
am
of
the
view
that
applicant/accused is entitled for regular bail on conditions.
Therefore, bail application needs to be allowed. Hence, I proceed to
pass following order :ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No. 271 of 2024 filed by
5
Applicant/accused is allowed.
2.

Applicant/accused namely Sudhir Anand Khandagale @
Dadya resident of Vashinaka, Chembur, Mumbai be released
on regular bail on furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- along
with one or more sureties in like amount in connection with
C.R. No. 684/2023 registered with R.C.F. police station for
the offence punishable under Sections 307, 341, 109 r/w 34
of I.P.C. r/w Sections 37(1)(A), 135, 142 of Maharashtra
Police Act on following conditions :(a) The applicant/accused is directed to attend the Court on
every date.
(b) The applicant/accused shall not enter into vicinity where
the informant resides.
(c) The applicant/accused and his sureties shall provide their
respective residential addresses, mobile numbers and email
addresses, if any to the Court. The applicant/accused shall
intimate any such change in address or telephone number
and Email ID forthwith.
(d) The applicant/accused should not directly or indirectly
make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with facts of case so as to dissuade them from
disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and should
not tamper with the evidence and prosecution witnesses.
(e) The applicant/accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of Ld.Sessions Court.
(f) Breach of any conditions by the applicant/accused, shall
6
result in cancellation of bail.
3.

Bail before Ld. Trial Court.

4.

Criminal Bail Application No. 271 of 2024 stands disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 09.02.2024
Dictated on
: 09/02/2024
Transcribed on : 09/02/2024
HHJ signed on : 13/02/2024
[A.S. SALGAR]
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
GREATER MUMBAI
(C.R. No.24)
7
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
14/02/2024 5.05 p.m.

Name of Stenographer
PRAJWALA V. PHODKAR
Name of the Judge (With Court HHJ SHRI. A.S. SALGAR (CR 24)
Room No.)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGMENT /ORDER
of 09/02/2024
JUDGMENT /ORDER signed by 13/02/2024
P.O. on
JUDGMENT /ORDER uploaded 14/02/2024
on