Nanasaheb Baburao Shinde vs The State Of Maharashtra on 6 May, 2026

    0
    29
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Supreme Court – Daily Orders

    Nanasaheb Baburao Shinde vs The State Of Maharashtra on 6 May, 2026

    Author: J.K. Maheshwari

    Bench: J.K. Maheshwari

                             ITEM NO.16               COURT NO.3         SECTION II-A
    
                                    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
                                              RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
    
                                Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
                                               No(s). 5748/2026
    
                             [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order
                             dated 27-01-2026 in CRLBA No. 1307/2025 passed by
                             the High Court of Judicature at Bombay]
    
                             NANASAHEB BABURAO SHINDE                   Petitioner(s)
    
                                                                   VERSUS
    
                             THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.            Respondent(s)

    Date : 06-05-2026 This petition was called on for
    hearing today.

    CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI
    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ATUL S. CHANDURKAR

    SPONSORED

    For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Sudhanshu Chaudhari, Sr. Adv.

    Mr. Vaibhav Yeshwant Kulkarni, AOR
    Mr. Pratik Jedhe, Adv.

    For Respondent(s) :Mr. Sachin Patil, AOR
    Mr. Geo Joseph, Adv.

    Mr. Rizvi Muhamed, Adv.

    Ms. Vishnu Priya, Adv.

    Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR
    Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
    Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.

    Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv.

    Ms. Chitransha Singh Sikarwar, Adv.

    UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the
    Signature Not Verified following
    Digitally signed by
    Gulshan Kumar Arora
    Date: 2026.05.07
    16:28:22 IST
    Reason:

    1
    SLP (Crl) No.5748/2026
    O R D E R

    1. Against an order rejecting the regular

    bail by the High Court and to seek bail,

    the present special leave petition has been

    filed.

    2. The petitioner is in custody w.e.f.

    14.01.2022 in connection with FIR No. 20 of

    2022 dated 12.01.2022 for the offences

    punishable under Sections 302, 307, 341,

    143, 147, 148, 149, 427, 120(B) and 201 of

    the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 3(24)

    and 4(25) of the Arms Act,, Sections 3 and

    7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Sections

    37(1), 37(3) read with Section 135 of the

    Maharashtra Police Act and Sections 3(1)

    (i), 3(2), 3(3) and 3(4) of the

    Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act,

    1999 registered with Police Station

    Lonikand, District Pune City, Maharashtra.

    2
    SLP (Crl) No.5748/2026

    3. After hearing learned counsel for the

    parties, looking to the role as assigned to

    him of having common intention of meetings

    done with the co-accused persons,

    simultaneously he has not made any overt

    act to deceased at the time of commission

    of crime. It is alleged that charges have

    not been framed yet and the son of the

    petitioner has also been murdered in cross-

    case by the other side. Considering the

    period of custody, delay in trial and also

    looking to the age of the accused, i.e., 70

    years, without expressing any opinion on

    the merits of the case, at present we are

    inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

    3. Accordingly, we direct that the

    petitioner be released on bail on

    furnishing the suitable bail bonds and

    3
    SLP (Crl) No.5748/2026
    sureties and on such other terms and

    conditions as may be deemed fit by the

    trial Court.

    4. Petitioner to abide all the conditions

    as imposed and. The petitioner is directed

    to attend the trial regularly without the

    leave and permission of the court. The

    petitioner shall not intimidate the

    complainant or the witnesses in any manner.

    Violation, if any, may give a cause to the

    complainant as well as the State to take

    recourse as permissible and the trial Court

    is at liberty to do the needful.

    5. Since the custody of the accused

    persons is prolonged and the charges have

    not yet been framed by the Court,

    Therefore, it is directed that the charges

    be framed within two months from today and

    4
    SLP (Crl) No.5748/2026
    the trial be concluded within a period of

    two years.

    6. Accordingly and in view of the

    foregoing, the special leave petition

    stands allowed.

    7. Pending application(s), if any, shall

    stand disposed of.

    (GULSHAN KUMAR ARORA) (NAND KISHOR)
    DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

    5
    SLP (Crl) No.5748/2026

    [ad_1]

    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here