Dilip Laxman Karale v. The State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3364 OF 2025 Dilip Laxman Karale ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
_______ Mr. Amar P. Dhumal a/w Mr. Sharad Bhosale for Applicant. Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for the Respondent-State. _______
CORAM
:
SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE :
16th SEPTEMBER 2025 P.C.
1.
By this application, applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.590 of 2024 registered with Karad Taluka Police Station, District Satara for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) & 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS"). 2.
It is prosecution's case that on 5th September 2024, the dead body of the deceased found in injured condition, hence offence was registered against unknown person. In investigation it revealed that the applicant assaulted the deceased with sharp weapon on the ground that the applicant had owe Rs.22,900/- to the deceased and as applicant was not paying the said amount, the deceased had asked physical relationship with the wife of applicant. Digitally signed by SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Date:
2025.09.17 15:31:42 +0530 SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR
3.
It is contention of learned counsel for applicant that the prosecution's case is based on circumstantial evidence. The applicant is behind bar around one year. The applicant has no antecedents. The applicant is Karta of his family. There is no progress in trial, though charge is framed. It may take time to conclude the trial. Hence, requested to allow the application.
4.
It is contention of learned A.P.P. that the applicant assaulted the deceased with sharp weapon and murdered him. The weapon used in the crime and mobile phone have been recovered at the instance of applicant. There are statements of witnesses, which shows that the applicant was last seen with the deceased. The applicant and deceased are from the same village. If applicant released on bail, he may threaten prosecution witnesses. The tower location of the applicant and deceased are from the same place. Hence, requested to reject the application.
5.
I have heard both learned counsels, perused the FIR and documents produced on record. The prosecution's case is based on circumstantial evidence. The Investigation is completed and chargesheet has been filed. The applicant is behind bar around one year. There is no progress in trial. The applicant is Karta of his family. Considering these facts, his further detention is not required.
6.
In view of the above, I pass the following order :
ORDER
(i) Application is allowed;
(ii) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.590 of 2024 registered with Karad Taluka Police Station, District Satara, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(iii) The applicant shall not enter in the village where the incident happened till recording of evidence of the prosecution witness namely Mr. Sanjay Sawant. (iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the witnesses or any person concerned with the case. (v) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court dates, regularly.
7.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.
8.
It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.
9.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)