✦ Bombay High Court

VAISHALI v. State of Maharashtra

Ba No. 4448 of 2025SHIVKUMAR DIGE2 min read

Case at a glance

Outcome

Allowed

Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 88. Considering these facts, I pass following order. 14-BA-4448-2025 (CR).doc Tikam ORDER (i) The Applicant- Natha @ Balu Vitthalrav Salve be released on bail in Crime No. 982/2024 dated 09/09/2024 registered with Wakad Police Station, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two…

Judgment

_________________________________________________________________ Mr. Shailesh Kharat, Advocate for Applicant. Smt. K.T. Hiwarale, APP for Respondent-State. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM DATE : : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. 24th FEBRUARY, 2026. P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the State.

2.

By this Application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.982/ 2024 dated 09/09/2024 registered with Wakad Police Station, District Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

It is prosecution's case that on 09/09/2024 around 8.30 a.m. Applicant and co-accused murdered the deceased on the ground that they were taking amount from the pocket of the deceased and he was resisting for him.

4.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that 14-BA-4448-2025 (CR).doc Tikam incident had occurred suddenly. The deceased, Application and co-accused consumed liquor and after consuming liquor, there were quarrel between them and out of said quarrel, deceased was murdered. Applicant has no antecedents. He is behind bars more than one years and six months and there is no progress in the trial and requested to allow the Application.

5.

It is contention of learned APP that Applicant assaulted the deceased when he resisted to take amount from his pocket. The Applicant made extra judicial confession before his wife. Her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. is recorded and in her statement, she has stated about extrajudicial confession made by the Applicant. The deceased was last seen with the Applicant and there is cctv footage. He submits that if Applicant released on bail, he may abscond and threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the Application.

6.

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.

7.

It appears from record that incident had occurred out of sudden quarrel. Applicant is behind bars more than one year and six months. The value of extrajudicial confession can be considering at the time of trial. Applicant has no antecedents, yet charge is not framed.

Operative part

8.

Considering these facts, I pass following order. 14-BA-4448-2025 (CR).doc Tikam ORDER (i) The Applicant- Natha @ Balu Vitthalrav Salve be released on bail in Crime No. 982/2024 dated 09/09/2024 registered with Wakad Police Station, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount. (ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. (iv) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required. Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (v) .

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 3(5), 103(1); Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Ba No. 4448 of 2025). ← Search more judgments