ANIL SANTLAL SAHU vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR — BA/772/2026

Case under Criminal Procedure Code (cr.pc) Section 439. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 05th May 2026.

CNR: HCBM010081932026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

BA/3523/2026

Filing Date

16-02-2026

Registration No

BA/772/2026

Registration Date

17-02-2026

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHIVKUMAR DIGE

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHIVKUMAR DIGE

Bench Type

Single

Category

BAIL ( 51 )

Sub-Category

Regular ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal

Decision Date

05th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.PC) Section 439
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483
Indian Penal Code (I.P.C) Section 307,376,34
Protection of Children from Sexual offence Act 2012 Section 4,6

Petitioner(s)

ANIL SANTLAL SAHU

Adv. Shubham Sudam Sane

Respondent(s)

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

XYZ

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHIVKUMAR DIGE

26-02-2026

FRESH ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)

05-05-2026

FOR PASSING ORDER

17-04-2026

FOR ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)

23-03-2026

FRESH ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)

Orders

05-05-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHIVKUMAR DIGE

Case Summary: BA/772/2026 The Bombay High Court granted bail to Anil Santlal Sahu, accused of attempted murder (IPC §307), rape (§376), and POCSO offences, after he spent six years in custody with trial still pending. The court weighed the prosecution's concerns about witness intimidation against the applicant's clean criminal record and prolonged incarceration, ultimately allowing bail on Rs. 30,000 personal recognizance with sureties and conditions prohibiting evidence tampering or witness contact. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: BA/772/2026 The Bombay High Court granted bail to Anil Santlal Sahu, accused of attempted murder (IPC §307), rape (§376), and POCSO offences, after he spent six years in custody with trial still pending. The court weighed the prosecution's concerns about witness intimidation against the applicant's clean criminal record and prolonged incarceration, ultimately allowing bail on Rs. 30,000 personal recognizance with sureties and conditions prohibiting evidence tampering or witness contact. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case