Changdev Ramrao Shelar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2026:BHC-AUG:5745 :: 1 ::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO.2414 OF 2025 Changdev Ramrao Shelar ... APPLICANT
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & anr.
... RESPONDENTS .......
Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate for applicant Ms R.R. Tandale, A.P.P. for respondent - State .......
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 9th FEBRUARY, 2026 PER COURT :
1.
By this application, the applicant seeks release on regular bail in connection with Crime No.299/2025, registered with Vaijapur Police Station, District Aurangabad (Rural) for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
The prosecution case is that, on the basis of MLC received on 15/6/2025, that deceased Anita Changdeo Shelar is admitted for treatment in critical condition and died during
:: 2 ::
treatment, upon inquiry in the hospital by the informant, the medical officer informed that the deceased died due to excessive bleeding caused by sharp weapon on her neck. Accordingly, for further investigation, went to the house of deceased and enquired with the daughter-in-law of the deceased, wherein came to know that, on 14/4/2025 in between 11.00 to 11.30 p.m., her father-in-law had quarreled with her mother-in-law and she had heard shouts. Thereafter she found her mother-in-law in pool of blood. Upon enquiry with the villagers, it was transpired that the applicant committed murder of his wife.
3.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that,there was no motive for the applicant to commit murder of his wife. The alleged incident occurred in the spur of moment. The investigation is complete and the necessary recovery is also effected from the applicant. As such, further incarceration of the applicant in custody would be unjustified. As such, prayed to allow the application. 4.
Per contra, the learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the application, submitting that the complicity of the applicant is rather evident and the witness to that effect has categorically stated so. As such, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. As such, prayed to reject the application.
:: 3 ::
5.
Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and on perusal of the material on record, including the Charge Sheet indicates, there is no eye witness to the incident. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. Neither the F.I.R. nor any of the statement of the prosecution witness indicate that there was motive prior to the alleged incident. Also, the applicant is 56 years old and is in custody for more than six months. Furthermore, the motive of applicant to commit murder of deceased is an aspect of trial. In that view of the matter, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.
6.
Nevertheless, the investigation is complete for all intents and purpose. In that view of the matter, further custody of the applicant is not warranted.
7.
Hence the order :
O R D E R
(i) Bail Application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant Changdev Ramrao Shelar be released on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount
:: 4 ::
in the above crime, on the conditions that :
(a) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses in any way.
(b) The applicant shall remain present on each date, unless exempted by the trial Court.
(iii) Needless to state that, the observations rendered herein are confined to the present application, and the trial Court shall decide the trial on its own merits and in accordance with law.
(SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) fmp/-