Muktabai Popat Barate v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Mar 2025BA/263/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail granted to mother accused of murdering her son; Crime No. 310 of 2023, Baramati Taluka Police Station, Pune (Rural); Sections 302, 201, 120(B) r/w 34 IPC; case based on circumstantial evidence; applicant in custody over one year six months; trial at framing-of-charge stage, not likely to conclude soon; P.R. bond Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties; Bombay High Court, N. R. Borkar, J.; Criminal Bail Application No. 263 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail in connection with Crime No. 310 of 2023 (Baramati Taluka Police Station, District : Pune (Rural)) on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; application disposed of accordingly. ¶ORDER (i)

Muktabai Popat Barate vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶ORDER (i)

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, accused of the murder of her son and of offences under Sections 302, 201, 120(B) r/w Section 34 IPC in Crime No. 310 of 2023, should be released on regular bail. +1 more

¶1

Court's answer

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the applicant was directed to be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 310 of 2023 registered at Baramati Taluka Police Station, District : Pune (Rural), on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶ORDER (ii)

Ratio / Principle

The court recorded that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and that the applicant had already been in jail for more than one year and six months.

¶7

Key takeaways

The court noted that the trial was not likely to be concluded in the near future, as it was still at the stage of framing of charge.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (N. R. Borkar, J.) allowed a regular bail application filed by Muktabai Popat Barate, mother of the deceased, who was arrested in Crime No. 310 of 2023 (Baramati Taluka Police Station, District : Pune (Rural)) for offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B) r/w Section 34 IPC on the allegation that, fed up with harassment by her liquor-addicted son, she hired a co-accused who murdered him on 22.05.2023. The court observed that the case rested on circumstantial evidence, that the applicant had been in jail for more than one year and six months, and that the trial was unlikely to conclude soon as it was still at the stage of framing of charge. On these considerations the applicant was ordered to be released on bail on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶1

5-BA-263-2025.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 263 OF 2025

¶4

Muktabai Popat Barate

¶5

...Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶8

Ms. Manisha Devkar a/w Mr. Shankar Katkar i/by Mr. Prashant Hagare, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶9

Mr. V. A. Kulkarni, A.P.P. for the Respondent – State.

¶10

Mr. Yuvraj Patil (PSI), Baramati Taluka Police Station, District : Pune (Rural), present.

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

This is an application for regular bail.

¶13

The applicant came to be arrested in Crime No. 310

¶14

of 2023 registered at Baramati Taluka Police Station, District : Pune (Rural) for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B), r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶15

The deceased was the son of present applicant.

¶16

According to the prosecution, the deceased was addicted to liquor. He used to harass the present applicant. It is alleged

1 of 3

Sajakali Jamadar

5-BA-263-2025.doc

that the applicant fed up with the said harassment, hired the co-accused to kill him. It is alleged that on the date of incident which took place on 22.05.2023, the co-accused assaulted the deceased and committed his murder.

¶21

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.

¶22

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail for more than one year and six months and the trial has not commenced.

¶23

On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State submits that there is enough incriminating material against the present applicant. It is submitted that considering the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail.

¶24

I have perused the charge-sheet. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. The applicant is in jail for more than one year and six months. The trial is not likely to be concluded in near future as it is still at the stage of framing of charge.

2 of 3

Sajakali Jamadar

5-BA-263-2025.doc

Considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, I

¶29

am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶30

ORDER

¶31

(i) Criminal Bail Application is allowed;

¶32

(ii) The applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 310 of 2023 registered at Baramati Taluka Police Station, District : Pune (Rural) for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B), r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶33

(iii) Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶34

(N. R. BORKAR, J.)

¶35

3 of 3

¶36

Sajakali Jamadar

Muktabai Popat Barate v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muktabai Popat Barate v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pundlik Babu Kene and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra

Sandip Vishwambhar Nale vs the State of Maharashtra

Amol Ashok Koli vs State of Maharashtra

Sachin Bhagwan Waghmare vs State of Maharashtra

Jauwan Nikkaram Singh and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra

Jitendrakumar Natwarlal Patel vs State of Maharashtra