Rajendra Yallappa Handifod v. State Of Maharashtra

Iresh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3205 OF 2024 Rajendra Yallappa Hadifod .....Applicant Vs.

State of Maharashtra .....Respondent Mr. Chirag R. Sonecha, Ms. Prajakta M. Shah for the applicant Ms. Veera Shinde APP for the State Mr. Sagar Shrikant Dhond, PC, Miraj City Police Station CORAM :

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

18th AUGUST 2025 P.C.:

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in IRESH MASHAL C.R. No. 258 of 2023 registered with Miraj City Police Station Digitally signed by IRESH MASHAL Date:

2025.08.19 17:33:59 +0530 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

It is the prosecution's case that deceased was habitual drunkard and he was harassing his family members. The applicant is father of the deceased. It is alleged that the applicant and his family members were fed up with the 1/4

activities of the deceased. On that ground, the applicant killed his son i.e. deceased and put his body parts in one Gunny bag. 3.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind the bar for more than two years, yet there is no progress in the trial. The prosecution's case is based on circumstantial evidence. He submits that if the applicant is released on bail, there is no threat to the society nor he will abscond. Hence, he requested to allow the application. 4.

It is the contention of learned APP that the applicant has murdered his son. The applicant had beheaded the head of his son and it was hidden and other body parts were kept in one Gunny bag. He himself had informed the first informant about the said act. Learned APP further submits that there is strong prima facie case against the applicant. All the prosecution witnesses are family members of the applicant and if the applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application. 5.

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused the F.I.R. and documents produced on record. The applicant is behind 2/4

bar for more than two years. The applicant is father of the deceased. It is alleged that the applicant murdered him due to behaviour of the deceased. The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. There is no progress in the trial. 6.

Considering these facts, further detention of applicant is not required and I pass following order :

O R D E R

I.

The applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R. No. 258 of 2023 registered with Miraj City Police Station on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

II.

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

III.

The 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 3/4

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.] 4/4