Vitthal Baban Nakade vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2026)

Vitthal Baban Nakade vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The Applicant is directed to be released on regular bail in connection with Crime Register No.545 of 2024 registered with Nerul Police Station (offences under Sections 140(1), 109(1), 103(1), 61(2), 238, 3(5), 45 and 54 of Bhartiya Naya Sanhita (BNS); Sections 3, 5, 25, 17 of Indian Arms Act; Sections 37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act) upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to conditions: (a) no tampering with evidence or contacting/influencing/threatening/intimidating witnesses, particularly family members of the deceased; (b) reporting to Nerul Police Station twice a month on the 1st and 15th of each month between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon until further orders; (c) not leaving the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Maharashtra without prior written permission of the Trial Court; (d) not committing any offence during the pendency of the trial; (e) providing current residential address and mobile number to the Investigating Officer and Trial Court and informing the Court in writing of any change; (f) prosecution free to move for cancellation of bail on breach of conditions.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant, arraigned in Crime No.545 of 2024 (Nerul Police Station) for offences under the Bhartiya Naya Sanhita (BNS), the Indian Arms Act and the Maharashtra Police Act, should be released on regular bail. +1 more

Court's answer

Apart from the circumstance that the Co-accused, who has been assigned a greater role than the Applicant, has been enlarged on bail, the Court found there is no other evidence in order to attribute the involvement of the Applicant in the crime.

Ratio / Principle

Once the Co-accused, who has been assigned a greater role in the crime in question, has been enlarged on bail, there remains no propriety in rejecting bail to the Applicant; bail was accordingly granted on the ground of parity.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Regular bail granted (R. M. Joshi, J.; order dated 8th May 2026) to Vitthal Baban Nakade in Criminal Bail Application No.558 of 2026 concerning Crime No.545 of 2024, Nerul Police Station - offences punishable under Sections 140(1), 109(1), 103(1), 61(2), 238, 3(5), 45 and 54 of Bhartiya Naya Sanhita (BNS), Sections 3, 5, 25, 17 of Indian Arms Act and Sections 37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act. Prosecution case: the deceased was killed by assailants; the dead body was recovered at the instance of the Co-accused pursuant to a statement recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act; chargesheet filed against the Applicant and co-accused. The Court held that apart from the fact that the Co-accused - who was assigned a greater role than the Applicant (alleged actual assailant, at whose instance the body was recovered, and who had himself been enlarged on bail on 9th April 2026 in Criminal Bail Application No.3959 of 2025) - there was no other evidence to attribute the Applicant's involvement; once the co-accused with the greater role was enlarged on bail, there remained no propriety in rejecting bail to the Applicant. Counsel for the Applicant had argued that, save alleged payments by the Applicant to Co-accused No.7, no other evidence connected him; learned APP opposed citing alleged conspiracy role, recovery of the Applicant's mobile phone and his criminal antecedents. Bail ordered on a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with like solvent sureties, subject to conditions including no witness tampering/contact (particularly with the deceased's family), twice-monthly reporting at Nerul Police Station (1st and 15th, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 noon), no exit from Maharashtra without Trial Court permission, no fresh offences, address/mobile particulars to IO and Trial Court, and liberty to prosecute to seek cancellation on breach.

913-BA558-2026.DOC

Shivgan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 558 OF 2026

Vitthal Baban Nakade ...Applicant Versus State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent

Mr. A.P. Mundargi , Senior Counsel, with Jayant Bardeskar, for the Applicant.

Ms. S.D.Shinde , APP for the Respondent-State.

CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED: 8^th MAY, 2026.

PC:-

The Applicant seeks bail in connection with Crime 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) and under Sections 3, 5, 25, 17 of Indian Arms Act and under Sections 37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act.

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 Co-accused pursuant to the statement recorded

Page 1 of 5 8^th May, 2026.

913-BA558-2026.DOC

under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. During the course of the investigation according to the prosecution, the involvement of the Applicant and the co-accused was seen and therefore, the chargesheet came to be filed against them.

The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submitted that the Co-accused against whom there is an allegation that he caused actual assault and at whose, instance, the dead-body has been recovered, has been enlarged on bail by order dated 9^th April 2026 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.3959 of 2025. It is his submission that except for the alleged payment of amounts by the Applicant to the Co-accused No.7, there is no other evidence to connect him with the crime in question. He therefore, seeks bail for the Applicant on the ground of parity.

The learned APP opposes the Application by contending that there is evidence to show that the Applicant was part of the conspiracy in killing of the deceased. It is her contention that having regard to the serious nature of the crime so also, recovery of mobile phone of the Applicant, which according to her, indicates his involvement in the conspiracy. The learned APP drew attention

Page 2 of 5 8^th May, 2026.

913-BA558-2026.DOC

of the Court to the fact that the Applicant has criminal antecedents.

Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that in spite of criminal history behind the Co-accused, he has been enlarged on bail.

Apart from the fact that the Co-accused, who has been assigned with greater role than the Applicant, has been enlarged on bail, there is no other evidence in order to attribute the involvement of the Applicant in the crime. Once, the Co-accused, who has been assigned greater role in the crime in question, has been enlarged on bail, there remains no propriety in rejecting bail

to the Applicant. Hence, following order:ORDER

i) The bail application is allowed ;

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

Page 3 of 5 8^th May, 2026.

913-BA558-2026.DOC

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:-

(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.

(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.

(c) The applicant shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Maharashtra without prior written permission of the Trial Court.

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

(e) The applicant shall at the time of furnishing surety,

Page 4 of 5 8^th May, 2026.

913-BA558-2026.DOC

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.

(f) In case of any breach of the conditions mentioned above, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

The bail application is allowed and disposed of.

SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN

Digitally signed by SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN Date: 2026.05.08 20:46:43 +0530

Page 5 of 5 8^th May, 2026.