Bombay High Court
Shiva Babu Nimbalkar And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 August, 2025
Author: Amit Borkar
Bench: Amit Borkar
2025:BHC-AS:36403
58-ba1234-2025.doc
AGK
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.1234 OF 2025
Ramapati Devi Shankar Sahu ... Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Digitally
signed by
Mr. Amin Solkar with Ms. Sejal Jain, and Mr. Mohd.
ATUL
ATUL
GANESH
GANESH
KULKARNI
KULKARNI Date:
Taha for the applicant.
2025.08.25
18:37:29
+0530
Mrs. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for the respondent-State.
CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.
DATED : AUGUST 25, 2025
P.C.:
1. The present bail application is filed by the applicant under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.” for
short). By this application, the applicant seeks his release on
regular bail in connection with Crime Register No.402 of 2019,
registered with Narpoli Police Station, for offences punishable
under Sections 302 and 397 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC” for short).
2. As per the case of the prosecution, the incident came to light
on 7th July 2019 at about 3.00 p.m. when the complainant, after
finishing his work in Thane, returned to his shop. On arrival, he
noticed a strong foul odor coming from the adjoining Shop No.11.
Sensing something amiss, he immediately contacted the Secretary
of the society, Mr. Abhimanyu Pandey, and apprised him of the
situation. Mr. Pandey, along with other members of the society,
1
::: Uploaded on – 25/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 25/08/2025 21:25:14 :::
58-ba1234-2025.doc
rushed to the spot. Considering the suspicious circumstances,
Narpoli Police Station was informed. The police reached at about
4.00 p.m., and in the presence of society members, the shutter of
the said shop was forcibly broken open with the help of a hammer.
Upon opening, a gruesome scene was revealed – a male body was
lying in a pool of blood inside the shop. The deceased, aged about
40-45 years, had sustained grievous injuries on the neck and the
right wrist, apparently caused by a sharp-edged weapon. The body
was found to be in a highly decomposed condition, indicating that
death had taken place about two to three days prior to its
discovery. In these circumstances, the complaint came to be
registered.
3. Learned Advocate for the applicant has argued that the
prosecution case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence, and
there is no direct evidence connecting the applicant with the
commission of the offence. It is submitted that the applicant came
to be arrested on 13th July 2019, i.e., nearly a week after the
incident. The charge-sheet has been filed citing as many as 41
witnesses. However, till date, not a single witness has been
examined. Thus, the trial is not likely to conclude in the near
future. Learned counsel, therefore, urged that prolonged
incarceration of the applicant without trial would amount to denial
of his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. On this basis, it is submitted that the
applicant deserves to be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned APP has strongly opposed the
grant of bail. It is submitted that the prosecution has collected
2
::: Uploaded on – 25/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 25/08/2025 21:25:14 :::
58-ba1234-2025.doc
material in the form of CCTV footage, which clearly indicates the
circumstance of the deceased last having been seen in the
company of the applicant. In addition, recovery of incriminating
articles at the instance of the applicant further strengthens the
prosecution case. According to the learned APP, these
circumstances, taken together, establish a strong prima facie case
of the applicant’s involvement in the heinous crime. Therefore, the
learned APP submits that this is not a fit case for grant of bail, and
the application deserves to be rejected.
5. I have considered the rival submissions advanced on behalf
of the applicant and the learned APP, and have also perused the
material placed on record. It is not in dispute that the case of the
prosecution is essentially founded upon circumstantial evidence.
There is no eye-witness to the incident. The principal reliance is
placed on CCTV footage showing the circumstance of last seen and
on certain recoveries made at the instance of the applicant. At this
stage, the veracity and evidentiary value of such material will be
tested only during the course of trial.
6. It is also an admitted position that the applicant has been in
custody since 13th July 2019, i.e., for more than six years. The
prosecution has cited as many as 41 witnesses, but till date not a
single witness has been examined. This clearly indicates that the
trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. The right to
speedy trial is a part of the fundamental right guaranteed under
Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Prolonged detention of an
undertrial prisoner, without reasonable progress in trial, amounts
to violation of this right.
3
::: Uploaded on – 25/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 25/08/2025 21:25:14 :::
58-ba1234-2025.doc
7. It is well settled that at the stage of considering bail, the
Court is not expected to meticulously appreciate the evidence, but
is required to balance the seriousness of the allegations with the
length of custody already undergone and the likelihood of early
completion of trial. In the present case, though the offence alleged
is undoubtedly grave and serious, the long incarceration of the
applicant without progress in trial weighs in favour of granting
him bail.
8. Having regard to the above circumstances, and taking into
account the settled principles of law, I am of the considered view
that further detention of the applicant is not justified. The
apprehension of the prosecution can be safeguarded by imposing
appropriate conditions.
9. Hence, following order is passed:
i) The bail application is allowed;
ii) The applicant is directed to be released on regular bail
in connection with 402 of 2019 registered with Narpoli
Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 302,
397 read with Section 34 of the IPC, upon furnishing a
personal bond of Rs.50,000-/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)
with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following
conditions:
(a) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence, or
directly or indirectly contact, influence, threaten, or
intimidate any witness, particularly family members of the4
::: Uploaded on – 25/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 25/08/2025 21:25:14 :::
58-ba1234-2025.docdeceased.
(b) The applicant shall report to the Narpoli Police Station
once in a month, specifically on the 1st Monday of each
month, between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon, until further
orders.
(c) The applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without its prior written permission.
(d) The applicant shall not commit any offence or engage
in any criminal activity during the pendency of the trial.
(e) The applicant shall, at the time of furnishing surety,
provide his current residential address and mobile number to
the Investigating Officer as well as the Trial Court, and shall
inform the Court in writing of any change in residence or
contact details during the pendency of the case.
(f) In case of any breach of the conditions mentioned
above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
10. The bail application is allowed and disposed of.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
5
::: Uploaded on – 25/08/2025 ::: Downloaded on – 25/08/2025 21:25:14 :::