Bajirao @ Babu Damodar Waghmare v. the State of Maharahstra

Bombay HC4 Feb 2025IA/5001/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail pending appeal refused; murder of wife Rani on 27/11/2014 (offence u/s 302 IPC); conviction dated 30/08/2017 by Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur in Sessions Case No.11/2015; sentence of life imprisonment plus Rs.4,000/- fine; FIR C.R.No.237/2014 at Mangalvedha Police Station lodged by Tanaji, brother of the deceased; key witness P.W.9 Damodar Waghmare (Applicant's father); sickle recovered at the spot; Applicant in custody since 2014; appeal expedited to weekly final hearing board from 18/08/2025 (High On Board); Bombay High Court, Kotwal & Chandak JJ.; advocates Shankar M. Katkar (Applicant) and Geeta P. Mulekar (APP for State).

What did the court decide?

Bail pending appeal refused; the Appeal directed to be added to the weekly final hearing board commencing 18/08/2025 (High On Board). ¶¶31

Bajirao @ Babu Damodar Waghmare vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail pending appeal refused; the Appeal directed to be added to the weekly final hearing board commencing 18/08/2025 (High On Board).

¶¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant, convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment, should be released on bail pending disposal of Criminal Appeal No.1325 of 2024.

¶¶15

Court's answer

The evidence of P.W.9 Damodar Waghmare (the Applicant's father) is very clear; he had no reason to implicate the Applicant falsely, and no other person could have committed the murder of the deceased Rani.

¶¶27

Ratio / Principle

The Applicant was present near the dead body and the murder weapon was recovered at the spot.

¶¶29

Key takeaways

Bail pending appeal is refused: the evidence against the Applicant is strong and the offence is grave and serious.ratio¶¶30
Since the Applicant is in custody since 2014, the Appeal is directed to be added to the weekly final hearing board commencing 18/08/2025, High On Board.ratio¶¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction), Sarang V. Kotwal & Shyam C. Chandak, JJ. (03-07-2025): Interim Application No.5001 of 2024 in Criminal Appeal No.1325 of 2024 — bail pending appeal sought by Bajirao @ Babu Damodar Waghmare, convicted on 30/08/2017 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur (Sessions Case No.11/2015) under S.302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment plus a fine of Rs.4,000/-. Incident of 27/11/2014: the Applicant allegedly murdered his wife Rani by assaulting her throat with a sharp weapon; FIR lodged by her brother Tanaji (C.R.No.237/2014, Mangalvedha Police Station); Applicant arrested the same day. The Court relied on the testimony of P.W.9, the Applicant's father, who saw Rani lying in a pool of blood, the Applicant at some distance and a sickle on the ground; held the evidence very clear, the father had no reason to falsely implicate the Applicant, no other person could have committed the murder, the Applicant was present near the dead body and the murder weapon was recovered at the spot. The offence being grave and serious, bail was refused. Since the Applicant is in custody since 2014, the Appeal was directed to be added to the weekly final hearing board commencing 18/08/2025, High On Board. The application was disposed of.

¶1

1 / 4 16-IA-5001-24-IN-APEAL-1325-24.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.5001 OF 2024 IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1325 OF 2024

¶5

Bajirao @ Babu Damodar Waghmare

¶6

.... Applicant

¶7

versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

.... Respondent

¶10

Mr. Shankar M. Katkar, Advocate for Applicant.

¶11

Ms. Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the State/Respondent.

¶12

CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ. DATE : 03^rd JULY, 2025

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

Digitally signed by MANUSHREE MANUSHREE NESARIKAR NESARIKAR Date: 2025.07.09 14:58:57 +0530

¶15

This is an application for bail pending Appeal. The Applicant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pandharpur, vide his Judgment and Order dated 30/08/2017 passed in Sessions Case No.11/2015 for commission of offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months.

¶16

Nesarikar

¶17

16-IA-5001-24-IN-APEAL-1325-24.odt

¶18

2 / 4

¶19

Heard Mr. Shankar M. Katkar, learned counsel for the Applicant and Ms. Geeta P. Mulekar, learned APP for the State.

¶20

The incident is dated 27/11/2014. The prosecution case is that in the night the Applicant assaulted his wife Rani with a sharp weapon on her throat and committed her murder. The incident was informed to the deceased’s brother Tanaji by the Applicant’s father. Tanaji lodged his FIR. The investigation commenced. The Applicant was arrested on 27/11/2014 itself.

¶21

Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that at the time of incident, the Applicant was not present in the house. The evidence of his father is not reliable. His statement is recorded belatedly.

¶22

Learned APP submitted that the Applicant’s own father

¶23

has given cogent evidence against the Applicant. Therefore, based on that evidence, the prosecution has proved its case.

¶24

3 / 4 16-IA-5001-24-IN-APEAL-1325-24.odt

¶25

We have considered these submissions. The FIR is

¶26

lodged by brother of the deceased. According to the prosecution case, Tanaji’s FIR was lodged on 27/11/2014 at 06.50 a.m. at Mangalvedha Police Station, vide C.R.No.237/2014. He had stated that the Applicant and the informant’s sister Rani had five daughters. Therefore, the Applicant was not happy. He had grudge against the deceased Rani. On the fateful night the Applicant assaulted her with a sharp weapon. We have perused the evidence of P.W.9 Damodar Waghmare, who is father of the Applicant. He has stated that in the night, the Applicant’s wife Rani and their two daughters were sleeping on the first floor. He himself, his wife and other three grand daughters slept on the ground floor. In the night, he heard shouts. He went to the first floor and saw that Rani was lying in the pool of blood. At that time, his son i.e. the Applicant was present at some distance. He also saw a sickle lying on the ground.

¶27

This evidence is very clear. The Applicant’s father had no reason to implicate him falsely. There was no other person, who could have committed the murder of the deceased Rani.

¶28

4 / 4 16-IA-5001-24-IN-APEAL-1325-24.odt

¶29

The Applicant was present near the dead body. Murder weapon was recovered at the spot.

¶30

This is a strong evidence against the Applicant. The offence is grave and serious. Therefore, we are not inclined to grant bail to the Applicant. However, since the Applicant is in custody since 2014, the Appeal be added to the weekly final hearing board commencing from 18/08/2025, High On Board.

¶31

The application is disposed of.

¶32

(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)

¶33

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Bajirao @ Babu Damodar Waghmare v. the State of Maharahstra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bajirao @ Babu Damodar Waghmare v. the State of Maharahstra

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

Vinu Jankya Kadali vs State of Maharashtra

Pankaj Girijashankar Mishra vs State of Maharashtra

Sakalsingh Haridas Pawar vs the State of Maharashtra

Sakhrabai Shivaji Mallav vs the State of Maharashtra

Bajirao @ Babu Damodar Waghmare vs the State of Maharahstra

Bharat Ladak Padavi vs State of Maharashtra