Jitesh @ Munna Ravindra Jagtap vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2026)

Jitesh @ Munna Ravindra Jagtap vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both applicants (Jitesh @ Munna Ravindra Jagtap and Mayur Nitin Avchare) enlarged on bail in Crime No. 238 of 2024 on executing P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount; to attend the concerned police station as and when required; not to tamper with evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or persons concerned with the case.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants should be enlarged on regular bail in Crime No. 238 of 2024 (Ss. 302, 120-B r/w 34 IPC and allied provisions including MCOCA), having regard to their alleged roles of conspiracy and keeping watch on the deceased, the evidence needed to prove those roles, their incarceration of over 1½ years, absence of any offence registered against them with the gang leader, and the lack of progress in the trial.

Court's answer

Bail granted because the alleged roles of conspiracy and keeping watch can be established only through evidence; the applicants have not committed any offence with the gang leader; they have been behind bars for more than 1½ years; and there is no progress in the trial.

Ratio / Principle

The applicants (Jitesh @ Munna Ravindra Jagtap and Mayur Nitin Avchare) are to be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 238 of 2024 on executing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount.

Key takeaways

Bail conditions: the applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when required, and shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.ratio¶36
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, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.obiter¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Shivkumar Dige, J.), common order dated 25 February 2026 in Criminal Bail Applications Nos. 1733 and 4246 of 2025: regular bail allowed to Jitesh @ Munna Ravindra Jagtap and Mayur Nitin Avchare, accused in Crime No. 238 of 2024 (Sangavi Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad, Pune) for murder (S. 302 IPC), criminal conspiracy (Ss. 120-B/34 IPC) and allied Maharashtra Police Act, Indian Arms Act, Criminal Law Amendment Act and MCOCA offences arising out of a firing murder of 29 May 2024. Alleged roles — conspiracy (Jitesh) and keeping watch on the deceased (Mayur) — were held to require evidence for proof; the Court noted that no offence was registered against the applicants with the gang leader, that they had been incarcerated for over 1½ years, and that the trial had made no progress. Bail granted on a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- each with one or two sureties, conditioned on attending the police station as required and refraining from tampering with evidence or influencing/contacting witnesses; all observations confined to the bail purpose, the Trial Court to decide the case on its own merits uninfluenced by them.

15-BA-1733-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1733 OF 2025

Jitesh @ Munna Ravindra Jagtap ...Applicant Versus

The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

with

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHUBHADA SHANKAR SHANKAR KADAM KADAM Date: 2026.02.27 19:16:41 +0530

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4246 OF 2025

Mayur Nitin Avchare ...Applicant Versus

The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

Mr. Sachin Deokar along with Mr. Vignesh Ashokan, Advocate for Applicant in BA/1733/2025.

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi along with Mr. Ishan Paradkar and Mr. Avishkar Dhumal, Advocate for the Applicant in BA/4246/2025.

Mr. B. B.Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State.

PSI-Gangadhar S. Dhage, Sangvi Police Station, present.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 25^th FEBRUARY, 2026.

P.C. :

These two applications are arising out of the same crime,

hence, I am deciding them by this common order.

By these applications, the applicants are seeking regular bail in Crime No. 238 of 2024 registered with Sangavi Police Station, PimpriChinchwad, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, Section 37(1)

Page 1 of 4

15-BA-1733-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

(3) read with Section 135 and 142 of the Maharashtra Police Act, Section 3(25)(27) of the Indian Arms Act, Sections 3 and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999.

It is prosecution's case that on 29^th May 2024, the applicants and co-accused committed murder of first informant’s friend by firing at him. The allegations against the applicant - Jitesh @ Munna Ravindra Jagtap are that he conspired to kill the deceased, and the allegations

against applicant-Mayur Nitin Avchare are that he was keeping watch on the deceased.

It is contention of learned counsel for the respective applicants that the applicants were not present at the incident spot. To prove the allegations of conspiracy and keeping watch on the deceased, evidence is required. The applicants are behind bars for more than 1 ½ years. They have antecedents but no offence is registered against with gang leader. It may take time to conclude the trial, and requested to allow the applications.

It is contention of the learned APP that the applicants conspired to kill the deceased. Accordingly, the co-accused fired at him and murdered him. The applicant-Mayur was keeping watch on the deceased, and he gave a tip to the co-accused, and accordingly the deceased was

Page 2 of 4

15-BA-1733-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

attacked. The applicant- Jitesh was a part of the conspiracy to kill the deceased. If the applicants are released on bail, they may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the applications.

I have heard all learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. The allegations against the applicants are of conspiracy and keeping watch on the deceased. To prove the role of the applicants in the crime, evidence is required. The applicants have not committed any offence with the gang leader. The applicants are behind bars for more than 1 ½ years. There is no progress in the trial. Considering these facts, I pass the following order

ORDER

(i) The applicants viz.Jitesh @ Munna Ravindra Jagtap and Mayur Nitin Avchare be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 238 of 2024 registered with Sangavi Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad, District Pune, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/each with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

(iii) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any

Page 3 of 4

15-BA-1733-2025 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

person concerned with the case.

The applications are 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 4 of 4