Rahul Dilip Ingle v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps Yashodara Nagar, Nagpur
2026:BHC-NAG:393
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [B.A.] NO. 1296 OF 2025 Rahul Dilip Ingle -- 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.
Ms. T.H. Udeshi, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. CORAM :
M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE :
JANUARY 12, 2026.
Heard.
2.
The present application is filed seeking regular bail in Crime No.295/2025 for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS), registered with Yashodara Nagar Police Station, District Nagpur. 3.
The First Information Report is lodged by the father of the deceased who has alleged that on 16/04/2025 around 09:30 p.m., he was informed by a Police Officer from Kalmana Police Station that his son has been injured and taken to the hospital. When the informant along with his wife reached the hospital, their son was declared dead. Upon enquiry, he got to know that on the same day, around 08:30 to 09:00 p.m. his son got into a fight with his brotherin-law (Rahul Ingle) who attacked him with a cement
brick. The informant has further alleged that Rahul Ingle has previously given death threat to the deceased and they had an ongoing dispute relating to the marriage of deceased with his sister.
4.
The learned counsel for the applicant submits that except extra-judicial confession there is no other incriminating circumstances. He further submits that even if the story of prosecution is accepted as it is there is no intention on the part of the applicant, the act done by the applicant in the heat of anger. He submits that it is the deceased brother-in-law who has used abusive and filthy language due to which the incident occurred. This cannot be said to be a premeditated act. Therefore, prayed to grant bail.
5.
The learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed and submits that there is a strong motive against the applicant to commit murder. She further submits that two statements wherein present applicant has disclosed the incident i.e. in the nature of extrajudicial confession is sufficient to reject the bail. 6.
It appears that the applicant was implicated on the basis of extra-judicial confession made to two witnesses wherein the applicant himself has disclosed that the deceased, was his brother-inlaw, has abused him in filthy language, and therefore, in the heat of anger, he picked up the gattu (cement
brick) from the spot itself and gave two blows on the head of the deceased. Admittedly, the post-mortem report also shows that the cause of death is the head injury. It is mentioned in Column No.23 that, injury No.3 and 9 in column no.17 with its external injuries mentioned in column No.19, are the injuries in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Admittedly, the deceased is the brother-in-law of the present applicant. A quarrel took place between them, during which the deceased started hurling abuses, and in the heat of anger, the present applicant picked up a cement gattu and inflicted two blows on the head, which resulted in the death of the deceased brotherin-law. 7.
Considering the nature of accusation and the fact that there is no further evidence except the extra-judicial confession and whatever was happened was in a spur of moment and further the investigation is complete and charge-sheet is filed, in my opinion, this is a fit case to grant bail. 8.
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. In this view of the matter, following order is passed:-
O R D E R
(i) The Criminal Application is allowed;
(ii) The applicant/accused (Rahul Dilip Ingle) be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No.295/2025 registered with Yashodara Nagar Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS), on his furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one 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.
[ M.M. NERLIKAR, J ] Piyush Mahajan