Shivshankar Haribhau Ingale v. The State Of Maharashtra
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4159 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 839 of 2025 SHIVSHANKAR S/O HARIBHAU INGALE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ....
Advocate for the applicant : Adv. Pratik A. Bhosale a/w Adv. Amol B. Chalak A.P.P. for Respondent/State : Mrs. Bharati B. Gunjal ....
CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
RESERVING ON : FEBRUARY 05, 2026 PRONOUNCING ON : FEBRUARY 06, 2026 ORDER:- 1.
Heard rival submissions.
2.
By this application, the applicant, who is the original accused No.2 in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2022, is seeking suspension of his substantive sentence of life imprisonment, during the pendency of this appeal and also his release on bail.
3.
As per the prosecution story, one Krushna, who is the son of informant (P.W.1) had hired a vehicle on 18.11.2021 for coming from Chapoli to Osmanabad and thereafter, from Dhoki to Osmanabad, went on missing after having last conversation with the informant on phone at 8.00 p.m. On
(2) 19.11.2021, the informant lodged missing report. However, thereafter, it was traced out that the present applicant, along with other two accused, committed murder of Krushna. 4.
The learned counsel for the applicant submits that, the entire material on record indicates involvement of accused Nos. 1 and 3 only, but there is no whisper about the involvement of this applicant by any of the witnesses. On the contrary, he submits that the learned Trial Judge convicted the applicant merely on the basis of his confessional statement recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, wherein he had not even stated anything incriminating. He further submits that during the trial also the applicant was on bail and said bail was granted by this Court only, by observing that there was no prima facie material against him about his involvement. 5.
On the contrary, the learned A.P.P. strongly supported the conviction of the applicant/accused and submitted that, the learned Trial Judge after considering the entire material on record, has convicted him, and therefore, now there is no case made out by the applicant for his release on bail. 6.
Admittedly, the learned Trial Judge has convicted the present applicant along with other two accused, for the offence
(3) under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer life imprisonment. However, on going through the material on record and the impugned judgment, it appears that the learned Trial Judge has observed the involvement of this applicant in the crime merely on the basis of evidence of P.W.13 and Exhibit 93, which is his confessional statement, recorded by the concerned learned Judicial Magistrate. However, on going through the said confessional statement, it is evident that nothing incriminating has been stated by him, which can connect him with the crime. Only it has come on record in the said statement that he was in the pickup along with other two accused and when they started from Kaij, he slept in the said pick-up and when he got up, he saw one additional passenger sitting in the said pickup vehicle and thereafter he again slept in the vehicle.
7.
It is also significant to note that there is no eye witness to the incident and while releasing the applicant on bail during the trial, this Court under order 19.04.2023, had specifically observed that except the statement of co-accused, which is inadmissible, there was no incriminating material against this applicant. It was also observed that he was not lastly seen in
(4) the company of the deceased and the sole witness i.e. Auto Rickshaw driver also did not identify him in the Test Identification parade. Under such circumstances, there is no prima facie material on record to show his involvement in the crime. He was on bail during the trial. Considering all these aspects, we pass following order :-
ORDER
(A) The application is allowed.
(B) The substantive sentence of imprisonment of life imposed upon the applicant/accused Shivshankar Haribhau Ingale in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2022 under judgment and order dated 18.09.2025 passes by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-3, Dharashiv (Osmanabad) is hereby suspended during the pendency of this appeal.
(C) The applicant is released on execution of P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount.
(D) The application is accordingly disposed of.
(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE JUDGE YSK/