Priya Gopi Naik v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC7 Apr 2025BA/1368/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim adjournment order; Bombay High Court (Milind N. Jadhav, J.), 07-04-2025; clubbed bail applications BA 1368/2025 (Priya Gopi Naik) and BA 1370/2025 (Mahesh Govind Karale) v. State of Maharashtra; accused under Sections 302 and 34 IPC (murder with common intention); in custody since 31.12.2018; prolonged incarceration of 6 years 3 months urged as ground for bail; release said to aid defence of trial; trial underway, 8 of probable 51 witnesses examined; APP directed to obtain instructions on precise role and trial status; stand over to 09.06.2025; undertrial prisoners; no bail granted at this stage; no precedents discussed.

What the court decided

Priya Gopi Naik vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

5.BA.1368.2025+7.BA.1370.2025.doc

¶2

HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1368 OF 2025

¶6

Priya Gopi Naik .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶7

WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.1370 OF 2025

¶8

Mahesh Govind Karale .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶9

Mr. Kamble Sayabanna, Advocate for Applicant.

¶10

Mr. Hitendra J. Dedhia, APP for Respondent in Bail Application No.1368 of 2025.

¶11

Mr. Sukanta A. Karmakar, APP for Respondent in Bail Application No.1370 of 2025.

¶12

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : APRIL 07, 2025

¶13

P.C.:

¶14

1. Heard Mr. Kamble, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr.

¶15

Dedhia, learned APP for Respondent in Bail Application No.1368 of 2025 and Mr. Karmakar, learned APP for Respondent in Bail Application No.1370 of 2025.

¶16

2. Applicants are indicted in offence punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. They are incarcerated in prison since 31.12.2018 for the past 6 years and 3 months pending trial.

¶17

1 of 2

¶18

5.BA.1368.2025+7.BA.1370.2025.doc

¶19

3. Mr. Kamble would inform the Court that trial has commenced last year and 8 out of probable 51 prosecution witnesses have been examined by prosecution.

¶20

4. He would persuade the Court to consider long incarceration of Applicants for grant of bail as also persuade the Court to consider that if Applicants are released on bail they will be better position to defend the trial.

¶21

5. What impels this Court to consider case of Applicants is long incarceration in prison for past 6 years and 3 months pending trial. 6 years and 3 months undoubtedly is a long period of time.

¶22

6. Learned APP shall examine the submissions made by Mr. Kamble and take appropriate instructions and accordingly apprise the precise role of Applicants, as also the status of trial to enable this Court to consider the Applications on the next adjourned date.

¶23

7. Stand over to 09^th June, 2025 .

¶24

H. H. SAWANT

¶25

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

¶26

Digitally signed by HARSHADA HARSHADA HANUMANT HANUMANT SAWANT SAWANT Date: 2025.04.07 14:52:03 +0530

¶27

2 of 2

Priya Gopi Naik v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Priya Gopi Naik v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Subramaniam Arjun @ Super S/O Kalinurthy Arjun vs the State of Maharashtra

Anil Shamsundar Jetly vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rajkumar Yesudasan vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bhoomi Residency Co-Operative Housing Society vs Haresh Mehta

The Sarpanch Grampanchyat Kune Na Ma and Anr. vs Anil Narayan Pingale and Ors.

Shyamsunder Suresh Chauhan vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.