Sangitabai Rohidas Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra

2026:BHC-AUG:2110 :: 1 ::

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO.2574 OF 2025 Sangitabai Rohidas Patil ... APPLICANT

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT .......

Mr. R.R. Karpe, Advocate with Mr. S.R. Nikat, Advocate for applicant Mr. C.V. Bhadane, A.P.P. for respondent - State .......

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.274 OF 2026 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.2574 OF 2025 Ganesh Eknath Gopal ... APPLICANT

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & anr.

... RESPONDENTS .......

Mr. B.S. Doifode, Advocate for applicant Mr. C.V. Bhadane, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 - State Mr. R.R. Karpe, Advocate with Mr. S.R. Nikat, Advocate for respondent No.2 .......

:: 2 ::

CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE : 19th JANUARY, 2026 PER COURT :

1.

Criminal Application No.274/2026 is allowed. The complainant is permitted to assist learned A.P.P. 2.

The applicant seeks her release on regular bail in connection with Crime No.0660/2025, registered with M.I.D.C. Police Station, District Jalgaon for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 109, 118-2, 118-1, 352, 351-2, 189, 191-2, 191-1, 190 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sahnita,2023.

2.

The prosecution case is that, the applicant along with other accused, on account of political enmity, on 14/9/2025, during afternoon hours, assaulted the informant and others raising quarrel in relation to the construction work by means of spade and other weapons like sticks and committed murder of Eknath Nimba Gopal, father of the informant and also attempted to commit murder of witnesses by assaulting them, causing serious injuries. 3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present crime. The applicant is a lady, who is behind bars since 17/9/2025. Therefore,

:: 3 ::

prayed to allow the application.

4.

Per contra, learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the application, contending that, the offence is serious in nature in which murder of Eknath has been committed and attempted to commit murder of witnesses, causing serious injuries. 5.

After having heard learned counsel for both the sides and perusal of the material on record, particularly the statement of Janabai (mother of the informant) does not indicate any act/ role is attributed to the present applicant. Apart from the same, the applicant is a woman and is in custody for almost four months. Hence, considering the provisions of Section 480 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, being a woman, also deserves certain leniency. In that view of the matter, application warrants consideration.

6.

Nevertheless, the investigation is complete for all intents and purposes. Therefore, in my considered opinion, indefinite incarceration of the applicant is unjustified. Thus, the application warrants consideration, and accordingly, the discretion deserves to be exercised in favour of the applicant. Hence the order :

:: 4 ::

O R D E R

(i) Bail Application is allowed.

(ii) The applicant Sangitabai Rohidas Patil 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 in the above crime, on the conditions that :

(a) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

(b) The applicant shall remain present on each date, unless exempted by the trial Court.

(iii) Needless to state that, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an expression on merits of the case. Learned Trial Court shall proceed independently and uninfluenced by the observations made hereinabove. (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) fmp/-