AYUSH SANTOSHRAO BHAVSAR vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — BA/1679/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 07th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM010178332026
Filing Number
BA/7476/2026
Filing Date
08-04-2026
Registration No
BA/1679/2026
Registration Date
08-04-2026
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
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
AYUSH SANTOSHRAO BHAVSAR
Adv. HRISHIKESH P GIRI
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHIVKUMAR DIGE
FRESH ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)
FRESH ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | FRESH ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS) |
| 07-05-2026 | FRESH ADMISSION (BAIL APPLICATIONS) |
Orders
The High Court of Bombay granted bail to Ayush Santoshrao Bhavsar, who had been incarcerated for over seven months in connection with an alleged conspiracy to murder. The court found that while the applicant's name did not appear in the FIR and conspiracy charges remained unproven, his prolonged detention without trial progress and clean antecedents warranted release. Bail was granted on Rs. 25,000 personal recognizance bond with conditions including non-tampering with evidence, non-interference with witnesses, and regular police attendance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Bombay granted bail to Ayush Santoshrao Bhavsar, who had been incarcerated for over seven months in connection with an alleged conspiracy to murder. The court found that while the applicant's name did not appear in the FIR and conspiracy charges remained unproven, his prolonged detention without trial progress and clean antecedents warranted release. Bail was granted on Rs. 25,000 personal recognizance bond with conditions including non-tampering with evidence, non-interference with witnesses, and regular police attendance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts