IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.___________ OF 2024 (ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CRIMINAL) NO.15030/2024
SIDDHARTH MARIBA KAMBLE APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and
learned counsel appearing for the State.
3. Prima facie, the role attributed to the appellant
appears to be that he was present at the time of incident.
No overt act has been attributed to him. He has undergone
incarceration for a period of one year and 11 months. The
trial is yet to begin. 90 witnesses have been cited by the
prosecution. There were two other cases registered against
the appellant. In the first one, he has been acquitted and
the second is under Section 4(25) of the Arms Act, 1959
read with Sections 37(1) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police
Act.
4. Considering the role ascribed to the appellant and the
1
facts of the case, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on
bail.
5. Accordingly, we direct that the appellant shall be
produced before the Trial Court within a maximum period of
one week from today. The Trial Court shall enlarge the
appellant on bail on appropriate terms and conditions
including the condition of regularly and punctually
attending the Trial Court and cooperating with the Trial
Court for early disposal of th...