Salauddin @ Akash Manik Mondal Vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Salauddin @ Akash Manik Mondal Vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim application allowed: sentence imposed in Sessions Case No.120 of 2020 suspended; applicant released on bail on P.R bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; conditions imposed (monthly reporting to Trial Court from December, 2025; furnishing residential and contact details; unpaid fine to be paid before release); application stands disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the sentence imposed on the applicant should be suspended and the applicant enlarged on bail during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No.410 of 2024. +1 more

Court's answer

The sentence imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No.120 of 2020 against the applicant – Salauddin @ Akash Manik Mondal stands suspended.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a P.R bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions: reporting to the Trial Court once every month (every first Monday commencing December, 2025), furnishing residential and contact details to the Trial Court, and payment of any unpaid fine before release.

Key takeaways

As the case rests only on circumstantial evidence, the Court has prima facie doubt whether the chain of circumstances is so complete as to lead to the only hypothesis of the guilt of the accused; the Court noted the discrepancy between the Investigating Officer's evidence that a spade was used to kill the deceased and the prosecution case that a butcher's knife was the murder weapon, with discrepancy as to where the knife was found.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal No.410 of 2024 — Interim Application No.1187 of 2024 — suspension of sentence and enlargement on bail pending appeal — applicant convicted by Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No.120 of 2020 by judgment and order dated 11th January, 2024 — case based completely on circumstantial evidence — discrepancy in prosecution case regarding murder weapon: Investigating Officer (P.W.13) deposed that a spade was used to kill the deceased and thrown in tin shed beside the hotel, while prosecution proceeded on the footing that a butcher's knife was the murder weapon found at the spot, with discrepancy as to where the knife was found — 'last seen' evidence (son seeing deceased with applicant on 11th July, 2020 at 21.00 hours) alone insufficient absent complete chain — Court held prima facie doubt whether chain of circumstances so complete as to lead to only hypothesis of guilt — sentence suspended; applicant (in custody over five years since arrest on 16th July, 2020) released on bail on P.R bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in like amount — conditions: monthly reporting to Trial Court every first Monday commencing December, 2025; furnishing residential and contact details; unpaid fine to be paid before release — application disposed of. (Bombay High Court, Kolhapur Circuit Bench; Coram M.S. Karnik & Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ.; Oral Order per M.S. Karnik, J.; dated 19th November, 2025.)

6-IA-1187-2024.doc

Shailaja

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1187 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.410 OF 2024

Salauddin @ Akash Manik Mondal ] Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ] Respondent

….. Mr. Pranav Bhoite (through V.C.) a/w Mr. Tapan Thatte, for Applicant.

Ms. S. N. Deshmukh, A.P.P, for Respondent – State.

…..

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ

DATE : 19^th NOVEMBER, 2025.

ORAL ORDER: [PER M.S. KARNIK, J.]:

Heard Mr. Bhoite, learned Counsel for the applicant and Ms. Deshmukh, learned A.P.P, for respondent – State.

The date of ofence is intervening night of 11^th July, 2020 and 12^th July, 2020. The applicant was working as a Cook. The deceased was working as a Manager at Sourabh Beer Bar. One of the witnesses who was working as Waiter deposed that relations between the applicant and the deceased were strained. The applicant was arrested

1 of 4

SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE

Digitally signed by SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE Date: 2025.11.19 19:40:41 +0530

6-IA-1187-2024.doc

on 16^th July, 2020. The applicant is in custody for more than ive years.

With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.P.P, we have perused the evidence of the witnesses as well as the indings recorded by the Trial Court. The case is based completely on circumstantial evidence. It is alleged by the prosecution that the Trial Court has recorded the inding that the applicant has committed the ofence by killing the deceased with a butchers knife. The blood stained knife was recovered from the hotel. Evidence of the Investigating Oicer – P.W.13 is that it is spade that was used to kill the deceased. It was thrown in tin shed by the side of the hotel. However, evidence of one of the witnesses indicates that the butchers knife was found inside the kitchen. We have also perused the medical evidence on record. Cause of death is head injury. There are incised wounds reported which could be caused by the butchers knife.

Learned A.P.P vehemently opposed the suspension of

sentence. It is submitted that materials on record are suicient to prove the guilt of the accused as has been rightly observed by the Trial Court.

2 of 4

6-IA-1187-2024.doc

No doubt, the Trial Court observed that unless complete chain

of circumstances is shown to exist, mere last seen is insuicient for conviction. Son of the deceased had seen his father in the company of the applicant on 11^th July, 2020 at 21.00 hours when he went to Sourabh Bar. Though Investigation Oicer has deposed that spade was used to kill the deceased, however, prosecution case proceeded on the footing that butchers knife was used as murder weapon. Though the spade was recovered from the applicant, the butchers knife was found lying at the spot. There is some discrepancy as to where the butchers knife was found. In our opinion, as the case rests only on circumstantial evidence, prima facie, we have some doubt as to whether the chain of circumstances is so complete as to lead to the only hypothesis regarding the guilt of the accused. We are inclined to suspend the sentence imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur vide judgment and order dated 11^th January, 2024 in Sessions Case No.120 of 2020 and enlarge the applicant on bail. Hence, the following order;

: O R D E R :

[a] The sentence imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur in Sessions Case No.120 of 2020 against the applicant – Salauddin @ Akash Manik Mondal stands suspended.

3 of 4

6-IA-1187-2024.doc

[b] The applicant - Salauddin @ Akash Manik Mondal

is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

[c] The applicant shall report the Trial Court once in a month I.e every irst Monday of the month commencing from December, 2025.

[d] The applicant shall furnish his residential and contact details to the Trial Court.

[e] If the ine amount is not paid, the same shall be paid before releasing the applicant on bail.

The application stands disposed of.

[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] [M.S. KARNIK, J.]

4 of 4