High Court

Legal Reasoning

1945 BA.1415.2025.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,BENCH AT AURANGABAD.945 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1415 OF 2025ASHOK MAHADU RATHODVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA...Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Suresh Prabhakar Salgar.APP for Respondent / State : Mr. A. D. Wange....CORAM :SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.DATE :10th October, 2025. P.C.:1.This is an application for granting bail under section 439 ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with crime No.392of 2023 registered with Ramanandnagar police station, Tq. and DistrictJalgaon, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 201,read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. His application withsimilar prayer below Exh.27 in Sessions Case No.70 of 2024 came tobe rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, videorder dated 25.04.2025. 2.It is averred in the report by the informant that his brother ArunSonwane was having inimical terms with Sonu Adhale and his friendDodya @ Pintya i.e. present applicant. The said Sonu was dealingwith a business of sand and the punters were helping him. Sonu 2945 BA.1415.2025.odtAdhale is having his group viz. Baba group. There was quarrelbetween that group and brother of the informant Arun Sonwane. Theboys of the said group were trying to establish their dominance inSamta Nagar area of Jalgaon city. Sonu Adhale was settling thedisputes between the persons in that area. One Rani BhaskarShirsath was the niece of the present applicant. Her marriage wasscheduled to be performed with Arun Sonwane on 24.12.2023. Thesaid marriage was opposed by co-accused Pravin Sirsale. Co-accusedPravin Sirsale met Arun i.e. the brother of the informant andthreatened him that if he will marry with his niece, he will kill him priorto marriage. 3.The informant further averred that on 10.12.2023, at about 12.00noon, there was a quarrel between his cousin viz. Ganesh Sonwaneon one side and Nitin Sonwane, Akash Chavan and Tushar Kalal onanother side, at Wanjari Tekdi, Samta Nagar. On the same day atabout 4.30 p.m. when the informant was sitting near a Nala in Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Chowk, at that time, his brother Arun andAshish Sonwane came to him and stated him that they were called bySonu Adhale for settling the quarrel, which was occurred in themorning. They said that they are going to Wanjari takdi for settlingthat quarrel. Accordingly, the informant’s brother Arun and AshishSonwane went at Wanjari tekdi for settling that quarrel. After some 3945 BA.1415.2025.odttime, the informant heard hue and cry and he rushed there. He sawthat 1) Sonu Adhale, 2) Pappu Adhale, 3) Baliram Chavan, 4) Dodhya@ Pintya Shirsath and the applicant were assaulting Ashish Sonwanewith the help of choppers. Due to the hue and cry, the parents ofAshish Sonwane, uncle Nandlal Sonwane, aunt Rekha Sonwane andcousin Nitin Sonwane rushed to the spot, rescued Ashish Sonwanefrom the clutches of accused and taken him to hospital. Thereafter, theinformant saw that all the five accused persons were assaulting hisbrother Arun by choppers. When the informant went to rescue hisbrother, Co-accused Pravin and Sonu Adhale abused him in filthylanguage and assaulted on his neck. The informant tried to rescuehimself from clutches and made hue and cry for help. At that time, hisbrother Arun fell down. Sonu Adhale and the applicant assaulted onthe neck of Arun by choppers. The informant noticed that the bloodwas oozing from the neck of Arun. All the accused persons, includingthe applicant ran away from the spot. Immediately some personsgathered there. Arun was taken to the hospital in ambulance, wherehe was declared dead. The report was lodged on the same day atabout 22.39 hours. 4.Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicantis falsely implicated in the crime. He has no criminal antecedentsexcept the informant’s version and the statements of eye witnesses. 4945 BA.1415.2025.odtThere is absolutely no material against the applicant to hold him guiltyfor the offences punishable under sections 302, 307 and 201 read with34 of the I.P.C. Learned advocate further submitted that no anyweapon, like chopper etc. is seized at the instance of the applicant.His alleged blood stained clothes are also not seized when he wastaken in the police custody for one day. 5.The learned advocate for the applicant further submitted thatthere was no motive on the part of the applicant to commit the murderof Arun. He further submitted that the co-accused, Pravin Sirsale,whose role is identical to that of the present applicant, has beenreleased on bail by this Court vide order dated 21st August, 2025passed in Bail Application No.1698 of 2024. It is lastly prayed to allowthe application. 6.Learned A.P.P. for the respondent-State strongly opposed theapplication and submitted that the applicant is involved in a seriousoffence of murder. He further submitted that there is strong motive onthe part of this applicant for commission of murder. The quarrel tookplace on account of that marriage. There is evidence of two eyewitnesses, who have no reason to falsely implicate the applicant. Hesubmitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he will pressurize theprosecution witnesses. There is strong evidence against the applicant 5945 BA.1415.2025.odtand other accused. He lastly pointed out that the postmortem reportwherein 34 injuries are mentioned which are caused to deceasedArun. He submitted that considering the role of this application, parityis not applicable to the present applicant. He submitted thatconsidering the serious nature of the offence, this bail applicationdeserves to rejected. 7. Perused the charge sheet. The informant and the eyewitnesses have specifically stated that the applicant was present at thetime of incident and he had participated in the commission of crime.On perusal of report and the statements of witnesses, it appears thatgeneral allegations are made that the applicant and other accusedalso assaulted Arun and the informant with choppers. Though twochoppers are seized but they are not seized from the applicant. Hisblood stained clothes are not seized. No doubt, the witnesses havestated that the applicant was present and he has assaulted Arun andthe informant however, specific role is not stated by the witnesses.The report is lodged after five hours of the incident. 8.Considering the above aspects, if the applicant is kept behindbars, no purpose will be served. The trial will take a long period. Theapplicant has roots in the society and he has no criminal antecedents.Considering all these reasons, particularly vague and general 6945 BA.1415.2025.odtallegation of assault is made against the applicant and alsoconsidering the principle that ‘the bail is rule and jail is exception’, soalso on the ground of parity, the application deserves to be allowed oncertain conditions. Hence, the following order. O R D E RI.Application is allowed.II.The applicant in connection with crime No.392 of 2023registered with Ramanandnagar police station, Tq. and DistrictJalgaon, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307and 201 read with 34 of the I.P.C. (Sessions Case No. 70 of2024, pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon),be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs.50,000/-with one surety of the like amount on following conditions:- a)The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecutionevidence and shall not pressurize the witnesses, in anymanner. b)The applicant, except on the dates for attending the trialfixed by the trial court, shall not enter in Jalgaon city till thedecision of the Sessions Case. [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] nga