Mangesh Pundlik Lilke v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 5238 OF 2024 VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Mangesh Pundlik Lilke ...Applicant

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra

...Respondent

by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date:

2026.05.04 18:36:50 +0530 _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Akshay Bankapur, Advocate for Applicant.

Ms. K.T. Hiwrale, APP for Respondent-State.

_________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 27th APRIL, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

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

2.

By this application, Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 238 of 2024 registered with Dindori Police Station, Nashik for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860(for short 'IPC').

3.

It is prosecution's case that Applicant murdered the deceased by assaulting him with sharp weapon to take revenge of death of his brother as it is alleged that deceased had illicit relationship with the deceased brother of the Applicant and due to said relationship, brother of the deceased committed suicide by consuming poison.

4.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. There is no evidence produced on record to connect the present applicant with the crime. Applicant is behind bars almost two years. He has no antecedents. There is no progress in the trial and requested to allow the application. 5.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was last seen with the deceased. There are statements of the eye witnesses who had last seen the applicant with the deceased. The weapon used in the crime and mobile of the deceased have been recovered at the instance of the applicant. If applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application. 6.

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

7.

Applicant is behind bars almost two years. The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. To prove the case against the applicant, trial is required. Applicant has no antecedents. There is no progress in the trial. It may take time to conclude the trial. 8.

Considering these facts, I pass following order:

ORDER

(i) The Applicant-Mangesh Pundlik Lilke be released on bail in Crime No. 238 of 2024 registered with Dindori Police Station, Nashik, 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.

(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)