Dattatraya Namdev Ramane vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

Dattatraya Namdev Ramane vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.144 of 2024 (Radhanagari Police Station) on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to attending the Trial Court regularly on the dates of hearing.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, arraigned under S.302 IPC for the murder of the first informant's mother in Crime No.144 of 2024 (Radhanagari Police Station), should be enlarged on regular bail, in a case resting on circumstantial evidence with investigation complete, charge-sheet filed and custody exceeding one year.

Court's answer

The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence: the offence was initially registered against an unknown person and the applicant was arrested after one and a half months during investigation.

Ratio / Principle

What is alleged against the applicant is a quarrel with the deceased on the date of the incident; evidence is required to prove his role in the crime.

Key takeaways

The applicant has been behind bars for more than one year.ratio¶21
Considering these facts (wholly circumstantial case requiring proof of role, and custody already exceeding one year), the applicant's further detention is not required.ratio¶22
The observations in the order are made only for the purpose of granting bail; the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Murder, S.302 IPC (Radhanagari P.S. Crime No.144/2024): the first informant's mother was killed by a blow of stone on 22 April 2024; the FIR was originally against an unknown person, and the applicant was arrested about one and a half months later on the basis of an alleged quarrel with the deceased, the APP opposing bail on grounds of an old dispute, last-seen circumstance, dog-squad trace and risk of absconding/witness tampering. HELD (Shivkumar Dige, J.): the prosecution case rests wholly on circumstantial evidence and proof of the applicant's role would require evidence; investigation was complete and charge-sheet filed; the applicant had already been in custody for over one year, so further detention was not required. Bail granted on a P.R. Bond of Rs.30,000 with one or two sureties in the like amount, with a condition of regular attendance before the Trial Court. All observations confined to the bail stage; the trial is to be decided on its own merits, uninfluenced by this order. (Decided 20 August 2025.)

904-BA52492024 (CR).DOC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.5249 OF 2024

Dattatraya Namdev Ramane ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

Mr. Tejas Hilage for Applicant.

Mr. Avinash A. Naik APP for Respondent-State.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 20^th AUGUST 2025

P.C.

By this Application, applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.144 of 2024 registered with Radhanagari Police Station, District, Kolhapur for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is prosecution’s case that on 22^nd April 2024 at around 12:30 p.m. the mother of the first informant was murdered by unknown person by giving a blow of stone. The offence was registered against unknown person. After one and half month of the incident applicant came to be arrested in connection with the murder of deceased, on the ground that he had quarrelled with the deceased on the day of incident.

Digitally signed by SAJAKALI SAJAKALI LIYAKAT LIYAKAT JAMADAR JAMADAR Date:2025.08.20 18:42:09 +0530

Page 1 of 3

Sajakali Jamadar

904-BA52492024 (CR).DOC

It is contention of learned counsel for applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no evidence against the applicant. Initially the offence was registered against unknown person. After one and half months of the incident, applicant is arrested in connection of the crime. Only on the basis of suspicion, applicant is behind bar for more than one year. Investigation is completed, charge-sheet has been filed. Hence, requested to allow the application.

It is contention of learned APP that applicant murdered the mother of deceased on the ground of old dispute. He was last seen with the deceased. The dog squad led to the grass where applicant was working which shows his involvement in the crime. If applicant is released on bail, he may threaten prosecution witness or may abscond. Hence, requested to reject the application.

I have heard both the learned counsels, perused the FIR and documents placed on record. Admittedly, initially offence was registered against unknown person. During investigation, after one and half months, applicant is arrested in connection of the crime. The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is alleged that on the date of incident, there was quarrel between applicant and deceased. To prove the role of applicant in present crime, evidence is

Page 2 of 3

Sajakali Jamadar

904-BA52492024 (CR).DOC

required. Applicant is behind bar for more than one year. Considering

these facts, his further detention is not required. Hence, I pass the following order :

ORDER

i. Application is allowed. ii. Applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.144 of 2024 registered with Radhanagari Police Station, District, Kolhapur on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/with one or two sureties in the like amount.

iii. The applicant shall attend Trial Court regularly on the date of hearing of the case.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

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.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Page 3 of 3

Sajakali Jamadar