Sachin Shivaji Thorat v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.10 OF 2026 Sachin Shivaji Thorat .....Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra .....Respondent Mr. Machindra Deshmukh, for the Applicant.

Mr. Pankaj P. Deokar, APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.

DATED : 9th FEBRUARY 2026 ORDER :- 1.

The Applicant-accused No.2 is arrested in Crime No.524 of 2024 registered with Vita Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5), 238 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

It is the case of prosecution that the Applicant alongwith other two co-accused has committed murder of one Bapurao Devappa Chavan with the sickle. The accused No.1 had grievance against the deceased that he has molested his mother and, therefore, on the date of incident, when he saw the deceased was consuming liquor, the accused persons were also present there and they decided to commit 1/3

murder of deceased. They chased him when he was going by his motor-cycle. The Applicant was driving the two-wheeler vehicle, on which two co-accused were riding. The accused No.1 assaulted the deceased with sickle. He cut his head and thereafter all of them fled away from the spot. Initially, the crime was registered against the unknown persons.

3.

The counsel for Applicant has stated that there is one eye witness, who has stated that this Applicant was driving the twowheeler and accused No.1 and 3 were riding on it and they assaulted the deceased with sickle and knife. The accused No.3 is juvenile and therefore, he is released on bail by the Juvenile Court. The role attributed to this Applicant is that he was sitting on the vehicle at the time of incident. He has not participated in the incident of assault to the deceased. Therefore, prayed to release him on bail. 4.

The learned APP opposed the application stating that there was conspiracy between these three persons. They went to commit a murder of deceased. The deceased was brutally killed by the accused persons. Though, the statement of eye-witness shows that the Applicant was sitting on his vehicle, he took other co-accused on his 2/3

vehicle and they fled away by his vehicle. His role is there. Hence, prayed to reject the application.

5.

Heard learned counsel appearing for both the parties. 6.

On perusal of statement of eye-witness, it appears that the Applicant alongwith the other two co-accused has chased the deceased. He went there and, thereafter, the accused No.1 has committed murder. Though the motive was of accused No.1 to commit murder, they conspired and chased the deceased. The Applicant helped the co-accused for committing murder. He took them upto the deceased and they fled away from the spot on his vehicle. His active role is there. Hence, this is not a fit case to release the Applicant on bail.

7.

Hence, the Application is rejected.

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date:

2026.02.10 18:43:19 +0530 RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD 3/3