Santosh Shivshankarappa Bodkhe v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Khallar, Tq. Daryapur Dist. Amravati
2026:BHC-NAG:1522
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [B.A.] NO. 1196 OF 2025 Santosh Shivshankarappa Bodkhe -- VERSUS -- State of Maharashtra __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
Mr. R.M. Daga, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. V.A. Thakre, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. Mr. A.A. Dhawas, Advocate for assist to prosecution. CORAM :
M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE :
JANUARY 30, 2026.
Heard.
2.
The present application is filed seeking regular bail in Crime No.95/2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 105, 125, 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS), registered with Police Station Khallar, District Amravati. 3.
On 13/05/2025, the informant, Sarika Sanjay Zhiparkar, residing at Village Nalwada, Taluka Daryapur, District Amravati, lodged a report stating that a dispute regarding adjacent land is pending in court between her family and their neighbour Vinod Sairise. While construction of a compound wall on their own land was in progress, accused Santosh
Shivshankarappa Bodkhe objected to the construction claiming right of way. On 12/05/2025 at about 10.00 p.m., the accused came to the informant's house, abused her father-in-law and demanded that the construction be stopped. When her father-in-law refused stating that they were constructing on their own land, the applicant went home and got 7-8 people along with him. They all started abusing informant's father-in-law and threatened him of dire consequences. Thereafter, the present applicant has thrown a brick on the head of her father-in-law who succumbed to injuries during treatment in the hospital. Based on these allegation, First Information Report came to be filed.
4.
Initially, offence of murder was registered, however, when the charge-sheet was filed, it was converted into the offence punishable under Section 105 of the BNS, 2023, i.e. culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
5.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant. It appears that there was a dispute between the informant and the present applicant's family on account of construction of wall, and on the day of incident, all the family members of the applicant came in front of the house and started verbally abusing informant's family, the present
applicant has thrown brick which hit on the head of the deceased, to which he succumbed to injury. 6.
The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the act was not intentional, and therefore, the police has filed the charge-sheet under section 105 of the BNS. He further submits that all the accused persons except the present applicant has been released on bail by this Court. The offence is individual in character. It does not have any impact on the society, and therefore, requested to release the applicant on bail as investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed.
7.
The learned counsel appearing for the intevenor submits that the informant has already moved an application before the trial Court making application against the investigating officer for filing charge-sheet under Section 105. He further submits that the case would not fall under Section 105, but under Section 103, and therefore, prayed to reject the application.
8.
On the other hand, the learned A.P.P.
opposes the application and submits that there is direct evidence against the present applicant, there is overt act, as he has thrown brick which hit on the head of the deceased, and accordingly, he died. He further submits that there are eye witnesses to the
incident. Lastly, it is submitted that the application be rejected.
9.
Upon hearing the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.P.P., admittedly, it appears that the present applicant has thrown brick on the head of the father-in-law of informant resulting into death of father-in-law. As could be gathered that, initially, the offence under Section 103 was registered, however, later on, after investigation, it was converted into Section 105 and the chargesheet under that provision was filed. Now, admittedly, the investigation is complete and the charge sheet is filed, and therefore, I do not see any reasons to keep the applicant behind bars.
10.
The observations of this Court are prima facie in nature. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of this Court and the observations are restricted to this bail application only. Hence, the following order:-
O R D E R
(i) The Criminal Application is allowed;
(ii) The applicant/accused (Santosh Shivshankarappa Bodkhe) be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No.95/2025 registered with Police Station
Khallar, District Amravati, for the offence punishable under Sections 105, 125, 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS), on his furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand Rupees) with one solvent surety in the like amount;
(iii) The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence;
(iv) The accused shall provide his residential address and cell number to Police Station concerned and shall not change his place of residence without prior intimation to the Investigating Agency;
(v) The accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial for two consecutive dates, or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail;
(vi) Pending Misc. Application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
[ M.M. NERLIKAR, J ] Piyush Mahajan