Jaisingh @ Raja Madhu Mudliyar vs State of Maharashtra

No.545 of 2024 registered with Nerul Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 140(1) 109(1), 103(1), 61(2), 238, 3(5), 45 and 54 of Bhartiya Naya Sanhita (BNS)

¶16

and under Sections 3, 5, 25, 17 of Indian Arms Act and under Sections 37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act.

¶17

1/5

¶18

5-ba3959-25.doc

¶19

In short, it is the prosecution case that the deceased was killed by the assailants. The dead body came to be recovered at the instance of the present Applicant pursuant to the statement recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. During the course of the investigation according to the prosecution, the involvement of the Applicant and the coaccused was seen and therefore, the chargesheet came to be filed against them.

¶20

At the outset, learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the co-accused Anand, Virendra and Ankush against whom similar role has been attributed, are already enlarged on bail. In this regard he made reference to the order dated 18^th August, 2025 passed in Bail Application No.3076 of 2025 and order dared 27^th November. 2025 passed in Bail Application No.4417 of 2025 by this Court granting bail to the co-accused. It is his submission that on parity, the Applicant is entitled for bail. He further makes statement that though four offences were registered against the Applicant, for the charge under Section 302 of IPC, he came to be acquitted. It is his submission that

¶21

2/5

¶22

5-ba3959-25.doc

¶23

there is no suppression of the said fact on behalf of the Applicant as it was pointed out to the Court at the first instance.

¶24

Learned APP opposed the application by citing the seriousness of the crime. It is her submission that the dead body was recovered at the instance of the present Applicant and which clearly indicates his involvement in the crime. She opposes bail also on the ground that there are criminal antecedents against the Applicant and the crimes of serious nature were registered against him.

¶25

The co-accused are granted bail by this Court by the orders mentioned herein above. The said orders are not challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Needless to say that having regard to the nature of evidence collected during the course of investigation, the role attributed through all the accused persons is similar in nature. As far as the antecedents against the Applicant is concerned, out of 4 murder cases, he is acquitted in 3 cases. It is pertinent to note that even the coaccused, who are granted bail, there are antecedents against them for commission of serious crime. Thus even on this ground,

¶26

3/5

¶27

5-ba3959-25.doc

¶28

parity cannot be denied. Hence the following order is passed :-

¶29

i). The bail application is allowed ;

¶30

ii). The applicant is directed to be released on regular bail in connection with Crime Register No.545 of 2024 registered with Nerul Police Station for offences punishable under Sections Sections 140(1) 109(1), 103(1), 61(2), 238, 3(5), 45 and 54 of Bhartiya Naya Sanhita (BNS) and under Sections 3, 5, 25, 17 of Indian Arms Act and under Sections 37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to the following conditions:-

¶31

(a) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence, or directly or indirectly contact, influence, threaten, or intimidate any witness, particularly family members of the deceased.

¶32

(b) The applicant shall report to the Nerul Police Station twice a month, specifically on the 1^st and 15^th day of each month, between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon, until further orders.

¶33

c) The applicant shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction

¶34

4/5

¶35

5-ba3959-25.doc

¶36

of the State of Maharashtra without prior written permission of the Trial Court.

¶37

(d) The applicant shall not commit any offence or engage in any criminal activity during the pendency of the trial

¶38

(e) The applicant shall at the time of furnishing surety, provide his current residential address and mobile number to the Investigating Officer as well as the Trial Court, and shall inform the Court in writing of any change in residence or contact details during the pendency of the case.

¶39

(f) In case of any breach of the conditions mentioned

¶40

above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶41

The bail application is allowed and disposed of

¶42

(R.M. JOSHI, J.)

¶43

5/5

Jaisingh @ Raja Madhu Mudliyar v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaisingh @ Raja Madhu Mudliyar v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Alhida Shah @ Heena Iqbal Chudesara vs State of Maharashtra

Shabbir Iqbal Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited, Pune vs Smt. Priyanka Sandip Jadhav and Ors.

Darshan Nishikant Parajnape vs the State of Maharashtra

Aladdin @ Alam Hamid Shaikh Alia Alahdin Hamid Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra

Asif Mohammed Hussain Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra