Dnyaneshwar @ Laxman Vitthal Deshmukh v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1233 OF 2025 VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Dnyaneshwar @ Laxman Vitthal Deshmukh ...Applicant
VERSUS
State Of Maharashtra
...Respondent
by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date:
2026.04.20 13:53:08 +0530 _________________________________________________________________ Ms. Sana R. Khan, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. B.B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM
: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 16th APRIL, 2026.
P.C. :
1.
Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the State.
2.
By this Application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 491 of 2024 registered with Satana Police Station, Dist. Nashik for the offence punishable under Sections 108, 85, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3.
It is prosecution's case that Applicant and co-accused mentally and physically tortured the daughter of first informant as she was not giving birth to son. Due to mental torture, she committed suicide along with three daughters. Applicant is brother-in-law of the deceased. 4.
It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that
applicant behind bars for more than 1 year and 9 months. At the time of incident, he was not residing with the deceased and her husband. He was staying separately. Applicant has no antecedents. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. It may take time to conclude the trial and requested to allow the application. 5.
It is contention of learned APP that in FIR there are specific allegations against the Applicant that he was taunting the deceased. The deceased on several occasions told the first informant and family members that Applicant and co-accused were mentally and physically harassing her. They taunted her for not giving birth to baby boy. 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 and perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. Applicant is brother-in-law of the deceased. He was not staying with the deceased, her husband and other co-accused. He was residing separately. To prove the allegations against the Applicant, evidence is required. He has no antecedents. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed. It may take time to conclude the trial.
7.
Considering these facts, I pass following order:
ORDER
(i) The Applicant be released on bail in Crime No. 491 of 2024 registered with Satana Police Station, Dist. 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.)