Pravin Bhanudas More v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3927 OF 2025 Pravin Bhanudas More ....Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Ms. Sahana Manjesh, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. Balraj B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State. Mr. Ashok Raut, Police Sub-Inspector, Baramati City, present. _________________________________________________________________
CORAM
: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 23rd MARCH, 2026.
P.C. :
1.
By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 766 of 2023 registered with Baramati City Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code 1860.
2.
It is prosecution's case the the applicant murdered the deceased on the ground of refusal to give anda-burji to the applicant on credit basis. 3.
It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecution's case is based on circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence against the applicant. The applicant is arrested on the basis of suspicion. The applicant is behind bars for more than 2 years and 5 SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM months. The applicant has no antecedents. Hence, requested to allow the SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.03.26 11:06:34 +0530 application.
4.
It is contention of learned APP that the incident is captured in CCTV footage. The applicant regularly visited the cart of the deceased, who sold anda-burji, and would often demand food without paying for the same due to which there was a dispute between the applicant and deceased. Due to the said dispute, the applicant murdered deceased. There are witnesses who have stated that the applicant would demand anda-burji from the deceased without paying any amount. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.
5.
I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. The prosecution's case is based on circumstantial evidence. To prove the role of the applicant in the crime, evidence is required. The applicant is behind bars for more than 2 years and 5 months, there is no progress in the trial. The applicant has no antecedents. Considering these facts, I pass following order :
ORDER
(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 766 of 2023 registered with Baramati City Police Station, District Pune, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- 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.)