Allowed

Ajay Sanjay Pawar v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC26 Feb 2024BA/776/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge bail application under CrPC 439 regarding a murder charge. Court considered circumstantial evidence, recovery of weapons, and lack of trial progress. Bail granted subject to conditions including bond, residential restrictions, and reporting.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with Rs. 25,000 bond and two sureties; staying out of Sangli district; reporting monthly to police; prohibition of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

Ajay Sanjay Pawar Vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

29-BA-776-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶2

2024:BHC-AS:8966

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.776 OF 2024

¶6

Ajay Sanjay Pawar…Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra…Respondent

¶7

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi, Advocate for the Applicant.
Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State.

¶8

CORAM:MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED :26th FEBRUARY 2024

¶9

PC:-

¶10

1. Heard Mr. Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for the

¶11

Applicant and Ms. Shinde, learned APP appearing for the
Respondent-State.

¶12

2. This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439

¶13

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The relevant details are
as follows:-

¶14

`1. C. R. No.`	`361 of 2022`
`2. Date of Registration of F.I.R.`	`27/09/2022`
`3. Name of Police Station`	`Sangli Police Station`

¶15

Page 1 of 7

¶16

29-BA-776-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶17

		`(Rural)`
`4.`	`Section/s invoked`	`302 r/w. 34 of the` `I.P.C., 1860`
`5.`	`Date of Incident`	`26/09/2022`
`6.`	`Date of Arrest`	`27/09/2022`
`7.`	`Date of filing of Charge-sheet`	`22/12/2022`

¶18

3.The Applicant – Ajay Sanjay Pawar is the Accused No. 1. As
per the prosecution case, Accused No. 2 – Daulat is the uncle of
Accused No. 1 – Ajay. Another uncle is Pratap Pawar. It appears
that as there was a relationship outside of marriage between the
wife of said Pratap Pawar and the deceased, Accused No. 1 and
Accused No. 2 were of the opinion that therefore, their family’s
name and reputation is tarnished in the entire village. Therefore,
the Applicant – Accused No.1 and Accused No. 2 have committed
murder of the deceased on 26th June 2022.

¶19

4.Mr. Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant
submitted that the case is of circumstantial evidence. He submitted
that except the last seen together, recovery of sickle and extra-
judicial confession, there is no other incriminating material against
the Applicant. The motive alleged is very weak. He submitted that
there are no antecedents. Investigation is complete and Charge-

¶20

Page 2 of 7

¶21

29-BA-776-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶22

sheet is filed on 22nd December 2022. Till date, there is no progress
in the trial. Even charge is not framed. He submitted that co-
Accused i.e. Accused No.2-Daulat Sarjerao Pawar has been granted
bail by order dated 16th February 2024 passed in Criminal Bail
Application No.3404 of 2023. He, therefore, submitted that the
Applicant be released on bail.

¶23

5.On the other hand, Ms. Shinde, learned APP appearing for
the Respondent – State vehemently opposed the Bail Application.
She pointed out various statements recorded during the
investigation. She submitted that although the case is of
circumstantial evidence, the circumstances are very strong. She
submitted that Accused No. 2 and Accused No. 1 were last seen
together. After committing the offence in question, they have called
two witnesses on mobile and informed them that they have killed
the deceased. Thereafter, along with blood stained clothes, they
went to Shankar Sanjay Jadhav and informed him about the
incident. There is a recovery of blood stained clothes at the
instance of the Accused No.2. There is a recovery of sickle, at the
instance of Accused No. 1 i.e. the present Applicant. She submitted

¶24

Page 3 of 7

¶25

29-BA-776-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶26

that there is a strong motive for committing crime. Therefore, bail
may not be granted.

¶27

6.A perusal of the record shows that the incident has taken
place on 26.09.2022. Charge-sheet was filed on 22.12.2022. As per
the Charge-sheet, there are 39 witnesses proposed to be examined
by the prosecution. There is no progress in the trial. Even charge is
also not framed yet. The trial is likely to take a considerably long
time.

¶28

7.This is a case of circumstantial evidence. There is substance
in the contention raised by Ms. Shinde, the learned APP that some
of the circumstances are very strong, however, although charge-
sheet was filed on 22nd December 2022, there is no progress in the
trial. Even the charge is also not framed yet. The Applicant is
working as a construction labourer.

¶29

8. There are no criminal antecedents against the Applicant.

¶30

9. Mr. Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submitted that as several witnesses are residing in Sangli, the

¶31

Page 4 of 7

¶32

29-BA-776-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶33

Applicant will therefore not reside within District – Sangli and that
the Applicant will reside at the residence of Mr. Sanjay Balaso
Pawar, Ganesh Nagar, Galli No. 9, Ichalkaranji, District – Kolhapur.

¶34

10.By order dated 16th February 2024 passed in Criminal Bail
Application No.3404 of 2023, co-Accused i.e. Accused No.2-Daulat
Sarjerao Pawar has been granted bail by this Court.

¶35

11. The Applicant does not appear to be at risk of fight.

¶36

12.Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by
imposing conditions.

¶37

13.In view thereof, the following order:-

¶38

O R D E R

¶39

(a) The Applicant – Ajay Sanjay Pawar be released on bail in connection with C. R. No. 361 of 2022 registered with the Sangli Police Station(Rural), District- Sangli on his furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶40

Page 5 of 7

¶41

29-BA-776-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶42

(b) The Applicant shall not enter the Sangli - District after being released on bail, except for reporting to the Investigating Officer, if called and for attending the trial.

¶43

(c) On being released on bail, the Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto.

¶44

(d) The Applicant shall report to the Shahapur Police Station, Ichalkaranji once in a month, on first Sunday between 11.00 a.m.and 1.00 p.m. till the conclusion of the trial. The Police Inspector of Shahapur Police Station, Ichalkaranji to communicate details thereof to the Investigating Officer.

¶45

(e) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or

¶46

Page 6 of 7

¶47

29-BA-776-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶48

to any Police personnel.

¶49

(f) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not contact or influence the
Complainant or any witness in any manner.

¶50

(g)The Applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The
Applicant shall co-operate with the Trial Court and
shall not seek unnecessary adjournments thereat.

¶51

(h) The Applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer.

¶52

14. The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶53

15. It is clarified that the observations made herein are prima

¶54

facie and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits
and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶55

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶56

Signed by: Sonali Patil Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 26/02/2024 15:40:56

¶57

Page 7 of 7

Ajay Sanjay Pawar v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Sanjay Pawar v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dayalal M. Vaidya vs Kirtikumar Futurmal Jain and Anr.

Junaid Nasir Shaikh Vs State of Maharashtra

Ayub Khalid Khatri and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra

Vaibhav Vilas Gorane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shubham @Sonu Sanjay Dheb and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra

Sarika Bapu Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra