High Court
Legal Reasoning
1BA1518.2025+IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD929 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1518 OF 2025SAGAR UTTAM BHINGARDIVEVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA...WITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3108 OF 2025 IN BA/1518/2025…WITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3228 OF 2025IN BA/1518/2025…Advocate for Applicant : Ms. Sunita G. SonawaneAPP for Respondent / State: Mr. D. J. PatilAdvocate for Assist to PP: Mr. N. B. Narwade…CORAM :ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.DATE :14.08.2025P.C. : 1]Heard learned counsel for the applicant, thelearned APP for the respondent-State and the learnedcounsel for the assist to public prosecutor. 2]The applicant is seeking bail as he was arrestedon 03.12.2020 in connection with Crime No.0478/2020,dated 01.12.2020, registered with Supa Police Station,District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable underSections 302, 120(B) read with 34 of the Indian PenalCode, 1860. 2BA1518.2025+3]Earlier Bail Application No.86 of 2025 was filedby the applicant seeking bail on the medical grounds as hiswife is suffering from medical condition. By an interimorder dated 18.06.2025, the applicant was granted interimbail so as to enable him to make arrangements for medicaltreatment of his wife for a period of 4 weeks. Thereafter, another interim application filedbearing no.2579 of 2025 in Bail Application No.86/2025 forextension of interim bail period. However, the applicant’sinterim bail was not extended and this court by order dated15.07.2025 directed the applicant to surrender on21.07.2025. Thereafter, the applicant approached theHon’ble Apex Court challenging the order dated15.07.2025, passed in Criminal Application No.2579 of2025 in Bail Application No.86/2025. The Hon’ble ApexCourt by order dated 25.07.2025 extended the interim bailand granted time to surrender till 15.08.2025.On 28.07.2025, the matter was listed beforethis court, however, could not be taken up for hearing.Subsequently, when the matter was listed, on 05.08.2025,the learned counsel for the applicant sought leave of thiscourt to withdraw the Bail Application No.86 of 2025 andCriminal Application No.2579 of 2025 and the same weredismissed as withdrawn.4]The applicant, also, in the meanwhile, filed Bail 3BA1518.2025+Application No.1518 of 2025 on the ground of delay in trialand on merits. The applicant has also filed interim applicationNo.3108 of 2025, seeking extension of temporary bail tillthe disposal of the bail application no.1518 of 2025.However, it is noticed that the Bail Application Mo.86 of2025 filed on the ground of health issues of the applicant’swife was dismissed as withdrawn on 05.08.2025, as such,there is no pending bail application before this court on theground of health of the applicant’s wife.5]The present bail application pertains on theground of delay in trial and, also, on merits. However,considering that the Bail Application No.86/2025 waswithdrawn by the applicant and that the Supreme Court hasgranted time to surrender till 15.08.2025, this court listedthe present bail application for consideration today.6]The matter is taken up for hearing on theground of delayed trial and, also, on merits. The learnedcounsel for the applicant has relied upon the 3 orderspassed by this court. First order is dated 11.01.2023,wherein this court has observed that the trial is allotted tothe Fast Track Court and that the request was made toexpedite the trial and bail application was disposed of. It isfurther observed in the said order that if there is no materialprogress in the trial within 6 months, the applicant is at 4BA1518.2025+liberty to file bail application and the Bail ApplicationNo.1681 of 2022 was disposed of.Thereafter, another bail application was filedbearing Bail Application No.1836 of 2023, wherein thiscourt by order dated 30.11.2023 directed the trial court toconduct the trial on day to day basis and the applicationwas disposed of. This court observed that accused in behindthe bars for last 3 years. Thereafter, the co-accused filedBail Application No.2036 of 2023 and this court by orderdated 23.01.2024 directed the trial court to conduct thecase on day to day basis and conclude the recording ofevidence for all witnesses by end of April 2024 and that thefurther trial should be concluded before month. It isobserved that in the event the trial court does not concludethe trial within time limit then the applicant would have theright to move this court for bail on the ground of delay andright to speedy trial.The learned counsel for the applicant submitsthat in all there are 49 witnesses of which 29 are examined.The applicant is arrested on 03.12.2020. The applicant isnot directly involved in the assault. She submits that theapplicant is stated to have been one of the conspirators inthe crime and the applicant is behind the bars for 5 yearsand she also submits that on the ground of delayed trialand also that in the near future the trial may not conclude,bail may be granted to the applicant. The applicant has alsomade submissions on merits. 5BA1518.2025+7]Per contra, the learned counsel appearing forthe assist to public prosecutor and the learned APP submitthat the in all 49 witnesses would be examined by theprosecution out of which 29 are already examined and 20remains to be examined. They further submit that when theapplicant was on interim bail on medical grounds theapplicant has misused the liberty and that he has taken rallyi.e. in front of the jail people had gathered to welcome theapplicant and that the applicant was received by largenumber of people. As such, in the event, the applicant isgranted bail there would be pressure exerted on thewitnesses and in this regard crime is also registered underthe provisions of the Maharashtra Police Act for conductingthe rally without permission.The learned counsel for the assist to publicprosecutor has also on the merits of the case pointed outthe case of the prosecution as noted in paragraph no.7 ofthe trial court order dated 04.03.2022, as under:“7.Here it is the prosecution case that there wererelations in between accused no.6 Bal Bothe anddeceased Rekha Jare. On account of said relationship,there was bitter dispute between them. Accused no.6Bal Bothe used to give threats to the deceased inorder to kill her. So he contacted accused no.5 SagarBhingardive (the applicant herein). Accused SagarBhingardive contacted accused no.2 Aditya Cholakewho hired accused no.1 Dnyaneshwar @ GundyaShinde, no.3 Firoj Sahikh and no.4 Rushikesh TamyaPawar to commit murder of Rekha Jare. Accordingly,on 30.11.2020, deceased Rekha Jare was returningfrom Pune to Ahmednagar by car. Accused nos.1 and3 were waiting her at Jategaon Ghat. Accused no.6 6BA1518.2025+was taking location of deceased and was passing it toaccused no.5 who was passing it to accused no.2 andthen to accused nos.1 and 3. When the car reachedJategaon Ghat, accused nos.1 & 3 slightly brushed thecar by their motorcycle and raised quarrel, andthereby, slit the throat of Rekha Jare who succumbedto injuries.”8]In the instant case, the learned APP and thelearned counsel for the assist to public prosecutor points outthat the applicant’s role is that the main accused Bal Bothehas given him money in view of his disputes with thedeceased - Rekha Jare and the applicant hired people toeliminate Rekha Jare. The co-accused persons killed thedeceased. The CDR report clearly indicates that there werecommunications between the Bal Bothe and the presentapplicant. So also, the CDR report shows conversationbetween the applicant and the other accused, who areinvolved in the assault.9]The evidence that is available in terms of theCDR report and also in CCTV footage shows that accusedno.1 is seen carrying bag with money. The same bag withmoney is seen with the present applicant. Money isrecovered at the instance of the present applicant of aboutRs.6,00,000/- from the applicant’s own house. As such, thelearned APP submits that there is evidence available againstthe applicant that he is the conspirator.10]In response thereto, the learned counsel for the 7BA1518.2025+applicant submits that the conspiracy is easy to allege butdifficult to establish. The allegations are based on suspicion,that the applicant’s conversation with the co-accused is withreference to killing of Rekha Jare. She submits that theapplicant is completely third person and that there weresome dispute between Bal Bothe and the deceased. Theapplicant has communicated with Bal Bothe in regularcourse as they know each other for a long period of time.She submits that the evidence, as such, would give rise to asuspicion but would not be sufficient to convict theapplicant under Section 302 IPC. In any event, she submitsthat the applicant is behind the bars for 5 years and that theallegations against the applicant relates to the conspiracyand not assault against the deceased.11]The learned counsel for the assist to publicprosecutor and the learned APP also point out the orderdated 24.10.2024, that, in the application of Bal Bothesimilar prayer was made of a long incarceration anddelayed trial, however, the same has been rejected by thiscourt on 24.10.2024.12]Considering the nature of evidence that isavailable as against the applicant and, also, considering thenature of the allegations against the applicant that he is theconspirator and conspiracy being easy to allege and difficultto establish and the evidence as is available in the form of 8BA1518.2025+the CDR report and recovery of money and that the offencewill have to be established and decided in trial and that theapplicant is behind the bars for 5 years, as such, bail can begranted to the applicant.13]The applicant undertakes to attend each andevery date of the trial. Failure to attend 2 consecutive dateswithout prior permission would entail the trial court to seekrecall of the bail granted by this court.14]In view of the above, the application is allowedin the following terms : a]The applicant shall be released on bail inconnection with Crime No.0478/2020, dated01.12.2020, registered with Supa Police Station,District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishableunder Sections 302, 120(B) read with 34 of theIndian Penal Code, 1860, on furnishing PR bond ofRs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the likeamount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. b]The applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction ofAhmednagar District, during pendency of the trial,except the trial court date and one day before thatdate. 9BA1518.2025+c]The applicant shall not participate in anyrally. d]The applicant shall not influence or makecontact / communicate with any witnesses and not tointerfere with the evidence of the prosecution. e]The applicant, upon being released on bail,shall not contact the informant, in any mannerwhatsoever, during the pendency of the trial. f]The applicant shall co-operate with the trialCourt and he shall attend each and every date, unlessexempted by the trial Court.g]The applicant shall not tamper with theevidence of the prosecution and he shall not influencethe informant, witnesses and other persons concernedwith the case. h]The applicant, upon being released on bail,shall place on record of the trial Court the details ofhis Contact Number and residential address withupdates in case of any change. 15]Needless to say, in case of violation of any ofthe aforesaid conditions, the bail granted to the applicantshall be liable to be cancelled.
Decision
10BA1518.2025+16]It is also clarified that the observations made inthis order are limited to the disposal of the present bailapplication. The concerned Court shall proceed further inthe matter without being influenced by the observationsmade hereinabove. 17]The application stands disposed of.18]All pending applications also stands disposed of. [ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe