Ratna Mithailal Barud v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2868 OF 2025 Ratna Mithailal Barud ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

_________________________________________________________________ Mr. Aniket Vagal, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for Respondent-State. API- J. V. Dalavi, Nigadi Police Station, present. _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 23rd JANUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 737 of 2023 registered with Nigadi Police Station, PimpriChinchwad, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323, 452, 506, 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, Sections 4(25) of the Arms Act, Sections 37(1)(3) read wtih 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 and Sections 3(1)(i)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999.

SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM 2.

It is prosecution's case that on 7th December 2023, around 10:15 am, accused Nos.1 and 2 barged into the house of the first SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.01.28 11:15:59 +0530 informant and murdered her father. The applicant is the mother of the first

informant. It is alleged that on the say of the applicant, the accused Nos.1 and 2 murdered the deceased.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is a lady and she is behind bars for more than two years. The allegation against her is of conspiracy. She was not present at the time of the incident. She has no antecedents and requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant is the main culprit. On her say, accused Nos.1 and 2 murdered the deceased. The first informant is the daughter of the applicant. If the applicant is released on bail, she may threaten the first informant and prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard all learned counsel, perused the charge sheet, and documents produced on record. The applicant is a lady. She is behind bars for more than two years. There is no progress in the trial. The allegations are of conspiracy, and to prove them, evidence is required. It may take time to conclude the trial. Considering these facts, I pass the following order:

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 737 of 2023

registered with Nigadi Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

6.

It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

7.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)