Criminal Application No. 3586 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
917 BA NO. 1402 OF 2025.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD917 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1402 OF 2025KALYAN VASUDEV BHAVLEVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA...Mr. Rajendrraa Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. R. G. Dodiya,Advocate for ApplicantMr. A. D. Wange, APP for Respondent/StateMr. R. G. Gange a/w Mr. A. R. Hange, Advocate for the informant...WITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3586 OF 2025 IN BA/1402/2025CHAGAN BHIMA GHARBUDEVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER…Mr. R. G. Gange a/w Mr. A. R. Hange, Advocate for the informantMr. A. D. Wange, APP for Respondent/StateMr. Rajendrraa Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. R. G. Dodiya,Advocate for respondent No.2.…CORAM: SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.DATE:07.10.2025PER COURT :- CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3586 OF 2025 IN BA/1402/20251.This is an application for assist to prosecution.2.The learned advocate for the applicant is permitted to assist theprosecution.3.The application is disposed of. 1 of 6 (( 2 ))917 BA NO. 1402 OF 2025BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1402 OF 20251.Heard.2.This is an application for grant of regular bail under Section 483 ofthe Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with CrimeNo.287 of 2024 registered at Talwada Police Station, District Beed, for theoffences punishable under Sections 103, 61(2), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190,126(2) and 127(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.3.The learned advocate for the applicant pointed out the report in whichit is averred that the incident happened due to earlier enmity arising fromCrime No.15 of 2024. In that case, based on a complaint by Amol Bhavale,the informant’s brother, Bhagwan Gharbude, was allegedly falselyimplicated and later granted anticipatory bail. It is alleged that due to theefforts taken by Bhagwan’s son, Balaji alias Balasaheb Bhagwan Gharbude,to secure bail for his father, the complainant Amol Bhavale and his relativesdeveloped enmity towards him. On 03.09.2024, at about 03:15 P.M., theinformant, along with Abhishek Vilas Sark and Narayan Kalyan Bhandgarwas traveling from Pandharwadi village to Deshmukhwadi on a motorcycle.Near the fields of Babare and Yamgar, Umaji Bhavale came from theopposite direction and slapped the informant on his back. A few feet ahead,they saw Balaji approaching on his motorcyle. It is alleged that Ananta 2 of 6 (( 3 ))917 BA NO. 1402 OF 2025Bhavale, Kishkinda Bhavale, Umaji Bhavale and Amol Bhavale blockedBalaji’s path. Thereafter, Ramesh Bhavale, Kalyan Bhavale and SukhdevBhavale arrived and surrounded him. Umaji Bhavale allegedly stabbedBalaji on his right arm with a knife and Sukhdev Bhavale kicked him frombehind, causing him to fall on the road. Kishkinda Bhavale allegedlycaught hold of Balaji’s hands while Amol, Umaji, Ananta and RameshBhavale stabbed him multiple times on his stomach and chest with knives.After the attack, assuming Balaji to be dead, Sukhdev and Kalyan Bhavaleallegedly threw his body into a roadside pit. The accused then fled towardsPandharwadi. Balaji was later taken to the hospital, where he was declareddead. Thereafter, the report was lodged.4.The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicanthas been falsely implicated in the crime. The only role attributed to him isthat he pushed Balaji’s body into a roadside pit, assuming that he was dead.He further submitted that the applicant has roots in the society and he willnot flee away from the trial. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Thecharge sheet has already been filed and the trial will take a long period. It islastly prayed to allow the application.5.The learned APP for the State and the learned advocate for theinformant strongly opposed the application and pointed out the report, post 3 of 6
Legal Reasoning
(( 4 ))917 BA NO. 1402 OF 2025mortem report, statements of witnesses, seizure panchanama of the knifeand the filing and subsequent withdrawal of a writ petition by the applicant.It is also pointed out that in Chagan S/o Bhima Gharbude Vs. The State ofMaharashtra and Another, Criminal Writ Petition No.651 of 2025, thepetition was allowed, in which it was held in paragraph No.16 as under:“16.In the present case, looking to the application and looking tothe order impugned in the petition this Court does not find that in thepresent case such application is justifiable and the order is rightlypassed. The learned Sessions Judge while allowing the applicationhas not given sufficient reason as to what made the Court to thinkthat the application need to be allowed. It is merely observed that,no prejudice or harm would be caused to the prosecution if therecord is called. This reason can hardly be said to be sufficientenough to allow the application of the accused. Thus, in the presentcase, this Court finds that the exercise was improper. The impugnedorder, therefore, deserves to be quashed and set aside.”It is submitted that the said order was challenged by the applicant byfiling a petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.13584 of 2025 in theHon’ble Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court dismissed the same. It isfurther submitted that the applicant, along with the co-accused encircled 4 of 6
Decision
(( 5 ))917 BA NO. 1402 OF 2025Balaji after which the co-accused assaulted him. It is also submitted that theapplicant is involved in a serious crime of murder, if he is released on bail,he will certainly pressurize the prosecution witnesses and tamper with theevidence. It is lastly prayed to reject the application.6.Perused the charge sheet, particularly the report, post mortem report,statements of witnesses and documents pertaining to the writ petition, etc.,The role of the applicant, as pointed out in the report, is that he pushedBalaji’s body into a roadside pit, assuming that he was dead. Consideringhis role and the fact that the charge sheet has been filed, the applicant hasroots in the society, he will not flee away from the trial and the trial willtake a long period, the application deserves to be allowed on the principlethat bail is rule and jail is exception. Hence, the following order:::ORDER::I.The application is allowed. II.The applicant, in connection with Crime No.287 of 2024registered at Talwada Police Station, District Beed, for the offencespunishable under Sections 103, 61(2), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2)and 127(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail onfurnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like amounton following conditions:- 5 of 6 (( 6 ))917 BA NO. 1402 OF 2025a)The applicant shall not tamper with theprosecution evidence and shall not pressurize the witnesses, in anymanner. b)The applicant, except on the dates fixed forhearing of the trial, shall not enter in village Pandharwadi TahsilGeorai, District Beed, till the conclusion of the trial. [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] HRJadhav 6 of 6