Ganesh Shivaji Lokhande vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2026)

Ganesh Shivaji Lokhande vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail in Crime No. 589 of 2021 (Chandwad Police Station, District Pune) on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; conditions: attend the concerned police station as and when required, and not tamper with evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail in Crime No. 589 of 2021 (offences under Sections 302 and 498-A IPC), given that the prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence, the applicant has been in custody for more than four years five months, the trial is unconcluded with only one witness examined, and the applicant has no antecedents.

Court's answer

Bail is granted because the prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence, the applicant has been in custody for more than four years five months, the trial is not concluded and only one witness has been examined.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is to be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 589 of 2021 on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions of attending the police station as and when required and not tampering with evidence or attempting to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

Key takeaways

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 these observations.ratio¶¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Shivkumar Dige, J.) allowed a regular bail application by Ganesh Shivaji Lokhande, accused of murdering his wife on suspicion of her character (Crime No. 589 of 2021, Chandwad Police Station, District Pune; Sections 302 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code 1860). Bail was granted because the prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence, the applicant had already been in custody for more than four years five months, the trial was unconcluded with only one witness examined, and the applicant had no antecedents. Release ordered on a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, with conditions to attend the police station as required and not to tamper with evidence or contact or influence the complainant or witnesses. Observations expressly confined to the bail stage; the trial court to decide the case on its own merits uninfluenced by them.

3-BA-2250-2024 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2250 OF 2024

Ganesh Shivaji Lokhande ….Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. ….Respondents

Mr. A. Z. Mookhtiar (Appointed Advocate) along with Mr. Bhushan Ove, Advocate for Applicant.

Ms. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for Respondent-State.

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 23^rd APRIL, 2026.

P.C. :

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 589 of 2021 registered with Chandwad Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code 1860.

It is prosecution’s case that the applicant murdered his wife on suspicion of her character.

SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.04.24 15:25:30 +0530

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is behind bars for more than four years five months, yet only one witness has been examined. The prosecution’s case is based on circumstantial evidence. The statement of the daughter of the applicant

was recorded three months after the incident. The applicant has no antecedents and requested to allow the application.

Page 1 of 3

3-BA-2250-2024 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was suspecting the character of his wife, hence, assaulted and murdered her on the said ground. The incident was witnessed by the applicant’s daughter, and she has stated that the applicant murdered the deceased. The trial is in progress, and only one witness has been examined. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the application.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.

The prosecution’s case is based on circumstantial evidence. The applicant is behind bars for more than four years five months, yet the trial is not concluded and only one witness has been examined. The applicant has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial. Considering these facts, I pass the following order.

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 589 of 2021 registered with Chandwad Police Station, District Pune, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

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

Page 2 of 3

3-BA-2250-2024 (CR).doc

Shubhada S Kadam

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with 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.

Page 3 of 3