Mumbai, Maharashtra – April 23, 2024 – Sagar Jyotiram Matre, Kiran Vilas Barge, and Rajesh Ramesh Bhumkar have been granted bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai in connection with an assault and robbery case registered at the Trombay Police Station.

Background of the Case:

Matre, Barge, and Bhumkar were arrested and charged under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 397 (robbery, or attempt to commit robbery, with grievous hurt), 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach¹ of the peace), and 506(2) (criminal intimidation) read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code² (IPC), in connection with C.R. No. 113/2024.

The prosecution alleged that the accused assaulted the complainant and a witness, Akash, causing grievous injuries, and forcibly removed a gold ring from Akash.

Arguments Presented:

The accused, through their advocate Satish Sakat, argued that:

• They were innocent and falsely implicated.
• They had been in custody for 10 days.
• The complainant was discharged from the hospital on the same day of the incident.
• Further detention served no purpose.
• They were willing to abide by any court conditions.

The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Sachin Patil, opposed the bail application, arguing that:

• The offense was serious.
• The accused were habitual offenders.
• They caused grievous injuries.
• They forcibly removed a gold ring.
• They would tamper with witnesses if released.

Court’s Decision and Rationale:

Additional Sessions Judge A.S. Salgar granted bail to the accused. The court considered the following factors:

• Limited Roles of Accused 2 and 3: The court noted that Kiran Vilas Barge and Rajesh Ramesh Bhumkar (accused 2 and 3) were only alleged to have assaulted the complainant and Akash with fist blows and threatened bystanders. No weapons were attributed to them.
• Recovery of Weapons: The court observed that the weapons used in the crime (a bamboo stick and an iron rod) were recovered from Sagar Jyotiram Matre (accused 1).
• Completed Investigation (Mostly): The court found that the investigation was practically complete, with the recovery of weapons and the preparation of the spot panchanama.
• Residency and Risk of Absconding: The accused were permanent residents of Mumbai and were not likely to abscond.
• Time Spent in Custody: All three accused had been in jail since March 22, 2024.

The court concluded that the accused were entitled to bail, considering the limited roles of accused 2 and 3, the recovery of weapons, and the progress of the investigation.

Bail Conditions Imposed:

The court granted bail to Sagar Jyotiram Matre, Kiran Vilas Barge, and Rajesh Ramesh Bhumkar on the following conditions:

• Personal Bond and Surety: They must each furnish a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one or more sureties of the same amount.
• Police Station Attendance: They must attend the Trombay Police Station every Sunday between 10:00 AM and 12:00 PM until the charge sheet is filed.
• No Entry into Informant’s Vicinity: They must not enter the vicinity where the informant resides.
• Address and Contact Information: They and their sureties must provide their residential addresses, mobile numbers, and email addresses to the investigating officer and inform them of any changes.
• No Inducement or Threats: They must not directly or indirectly influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.
• No Leaving India: They must not leave India without the court’s permission.
• Bail Cancellation: Breach of any condition would result in bail cancellation.
• Provisional Cash Bail: Provisional cash bail of Rs. 25,000 was allowed for four weeks to furnish surety.
• Bail Execution: The bail must be executed before the trial court.

Significance of the Decision:

This decision highlights the court’s consideration of the specific roles attributed to each accused, the progress of the investigation, and the recovery of evidence when determining bail applications. The court’s decision to grant bail reflects its assessment that further detention was unnecessary, given the limited roles of accused 2 and 3 and the completion of the investigation regarding all three accused. The court also balanced the rights of the accused with the need to ensure their presence for trial and prevent any tampering with evidence by imposing stringent conditions.