High Court
Facts
*1* 945apeal509o25.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 509 OF 2025KHALIL NIZAMUDDIN THANEDARVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND RESHMA TANAJI SONKAMBLE...Shri S.B. Bhapkar, Advocate a/w Shri D.S. Bhapkar, Advocatefor the Appellant.Shri G.O. Wattamwar, APP for Respondent No.1/ State.Shri Ubaid S. Hashmi, Advocate for Respondent No.2(appointed).... CORAM : SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. DATE : 18 September, 2025Per Court :-1.By this appeal for regular bail, the appellant ispraying for quashing and setting aside the order dated 25.06.2025passed by the learned Special Judge/ Additional Sessions Judge,Latur, on application below Exhibit-5 in Special CaseNo.60/2025, by which, the said application for regular bail isrejected.2.The above bail application was preferred in Crimebearing FIR No.148/2025 registered on 08.03.2025 withVivekanand Chowk Police Station, Latur for the offencespunishable under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 353, 3(5) of theBharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(2) and 3(V) of the *2* 945apeal509o25.odtScheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention ofAtrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘the Atrocities Act’). The FIRcame to be lodged at the behest of respondent No.2/ informant(Reshma Tanaji Sonkamble).3.The informant lodged the report stating that she iswife of the deceased Tanaji Baburao Sonkamble. He used to dothe work of centring. Along with them, her nephew Ajay RamdasGaikwad was also residing and doing centring work. Herhusband Tanaji was doing centring work at Latur and Udgir withone contractor, namely, Mehraj Patel (accused No.1), who knewthat the informant belongs to the Scheduled Caste category. SinceMehraj Patel was not paying the amount, Tanaji stopped workingwith him. Therefore, on 04.03.2025 at about 10:00 in morning,Mehraj Patel came to the house of informant and he startedquarreling and abusing on the ground as to why Tanaji is notworking with him. At that time, Tanaji told that he is ready towork with him provided the money is released timely. Thereafter,Mehraj Patel left the house threatening them. On the next day i.e.05.03.2025 at about 10:00 am in morning, her husband Tanajiand nephew Ajay left house informing the informant that sinceMehraj Patel is ready to pay money of work, they are going fordoing work as assigned by Mehraj Patel at Latur. Thereafter, in *3* 945apeal509o25.odtevening at about 04:30 pm, her husband came home limping andupon enquiry, he told that Mehraj Patel had assaulted him withwooden stick on his hands, legs, chest and back. He alsoassaulted Ajay, however, Ajay fled away from spot. He alsothreatened him to commit his murder. Thereafter, her husbandtook rest at home. On the next day i.e. 06.03.2025 in earlymorning, he started feeling uncomfortable. Therefore, at about08:00 am, he was admitted in Government Hospital at Udgir.Doctor who examined him, informed that her husband is inserious condition and asked to take him to Latur for furthertreatment. Accordingly, he was taken in ambulance to CivilHospital at Latur where, he was admitted in ICU. However, atabout 04:30 pm on 07.03.2025, her husband Tanaji expired.Therefore, on 08.03.2025 at 19:18 hours, the report came to belodged that on 08.03.2025 her nephew Ajay disclosed that on05.03.2025 when Tanaji and Ajay went to Latur for doing thework assigned by Mehraj Patel, the accused persons came thereand assaulted them by fist and kick blows on account why theywere doing work of some other else. It is alleged that theappellant Khalil slapped Tanaji and Mehraj Patel asked theaccused Gaus to bring wooden stick and accordingly, he broughtthe same. Mehraj Patel is alleged to have assaulted Tanaji bywooden stick. However, Ajay fled away from the spot. *4* 945apeal509o25.odtTherefore, the informant lodged FIR against accusedpersons and Crime No.148/2025 came to be registered on08.03.2025.4.After registration of the FIR, investigation was setinto motion. Inquest panchanama was drawn and the body wasreferred to post-mortem examination. On 08.03.2025, post-mortem was conducted and it was noticed that there are as manyas 13 injuries and the opinion as to the cause of death is stated as“Evidence of multiple contusions over body in a clinical case ofHepatic encephalopathy with AKI with DIC with history ofphysical assault, however viscera, tissues and other samplespreserved for further examination.” On 09.03.2025, the Policehave drawn crime details form wherein, spot panchanama of theplace shown by Ajay, was conducted. The spot if incident isunder-construction house belonging to Mazhar Usman Shaikhlocated at Maharana Pratap Nagar. The Police have also obtainedCCTV footage of the spot, which came to be stored in pendriveand the certificate u/s 63(4)(c) is also procured. The Police havealso recorded the statement of sole eyewitness Ajay on08.03.2025. Accused were arrested on 09.03.2025. Aftercompleting investigation, the Police have filed charge-sheet andnow, the case is registered as Special Case No.60/2025. *5* 945apeal509o25.odt5.The appellant (Khalil) along with accused No.3(Gaus Isa Shaikh) filed the application Exhibit-5 in Special CaseNo.60/2025 for regular bail, which came to be rejected by theimpugned order dated 25.06.2025. Hence, the appellant hasapproached this Court by way of instant appeal.6.Learned advocate for the appellant submitted thatthe appellant is not alleged to have committed aggravated role ofassaulting the deceased by using stick. The provisions of theAtrocities Act are not attracted against the appellant. Theappellant is arrested on 09.03.2025 and since then he is behindbars. The charge-sheet is already filed and no purpose would beserved by keeping him behind bars. The sessions trial will taketoo much time to commence and conclude. Until and unless theaccused are convicted, they have to be treated as innocents.There is delay of three days in lodging FIR, which is notexplained by the prosecution. Since custody of the appellant isnot required, he be released on bail on any condition as thisCourt may deem fit and proper.7.Per contra, learned APP as well as learned advocatefor respondent No.2/ informant strongly opposed the grant of bailto the appellant. According to them, the appellant is involved inserious crime and if he is released on bail, he may threaten *6* 945apeal509o25.odtprosecution witnesses. The appellant along with other accusedhave brutally assaulted the deceased, which caused his death. Noleniency should be shown to the appellant while consideringinstant appeal. If the appellant is released on bail, he may not bemade himself available for trial. Thus, both prayed for rejectionof the appeal.8.With assistance of learned advocates for respectiveparties, I have gone through the material available on record aswell as the charge-sheet made available by learned APP to me.Prima facie, the record shows that the allegations of assaultingthe deceased are against accused No.1 Mehraj Patel. Theallegation against the appellant as per the statement of soleeyewitness Ajay is of slapping the deceased and Ajay. As such,no aggravated role of assaulting the deceased and Ajay has beenpointed out by Ajay in his statement. Investigation in crime isalready over and thus, custody of the appellant is not required.Since the appellant has made out prima facie case for grant ofregular bail, I am inclined to pass the following order:-ORDERa)The Criminal Appeal stands allowed and theimpugned order dated 25.06.2025 is quashed and set aside.b)In connection with Crime bearing FIR No.148/2025 *7* 945apeal509o25.odtregistered on 08.03.2025 with Vivekanand Chowk Police Station,Latur for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 115(2),353, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(2)and 3(V) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the appellant shall bereleased on bail on his furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/-[Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only] with one solvent surety/security in the like amount.c)The appellant shall attend the concerned policestation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shallalso attend the sessions trial on the dates as may be fixed by theconcerned Sessions Court.d)The appellant shall not try to contact or pressurizethe witnesses or the informant, in any manner whatsoever.e)Any breach of aforesaid condition, shall entitle theprosecution and informant to approach this court for cancellationof bail.9.Since learned advocate for respondent No.2 isappointed through legal aid, his fees shall be calculated and paidto him as per rules by the High Court Legal Aid Services Sub-Committee.
Legal Reasoning
*8* 945apeal509o25.odt10.However, it is made clear that the observations madein this order are prima facie in nature for the purpose ofadjudication of this appeal. kps ( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J. )