VITTHAL SADASHIV GUTTEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2026:BHC-AUG:42689




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2177 OF 2024

                                     Vitthal Sadashiv Gutte
                                             VERSUS
                              The State of Maharashtra and another

           Mr. P. P. More, Advocate for applicant
           Ms. P. J. Bharad, APP for respondent-State
           Ms. Supriya Gandhi, Advocate for respondent No. 2

                                              CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                              DATE      : 16th SEPTEMBER, 2026

           PER COURT :-


           1.          Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with crime No.

           0455 of 2024, registered with Vivekanand Chowk Police Station, Dist.

           Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 305, 354, 376(2)

           (F), 354, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and under

           Sections 5, 6, 8, 10 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

           Offences Act, and under Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2) and 3(2)

           (VA) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act.


           2.          First information report lodged by the father of the victim

           indicates that his two daughters, victim and her sister, were staying in

           girls hostel run by the mother of present applicant. There is allegation in

           the First Information Report that these two sons of Asha Sadashiv Gutte




           ABA-2177-2024 (copy).odt                                              1 of 6
used to call the victim in the office and used to cause harassment to her.

There is also allegation with regard to there being sexual harassment of

the victim girl. As far as incident occurred in the intervening night of

27.06.2024 and 28.06.2024, he claims that at about 8 A.M., he received

a phone call informing that the victim has fallen down and is being taken

to hospital. When informant went to the hospital at Latur, he came to

know from daughter that victim has died. On the basis of information

given by the sister of the victim, First Information Report came to be

lodged. It is alleged that the present applicant and his brothers caused

assault on the victim and she was found dead thereafter.


3.          Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is delay

of about a month in lodging of the report and the First Information

Report came to be lodged due to the pressure exaggerated by the

interested persons on the police machinery. It is his further submission

that the applicant is a permanent resident of Pune and on the date of the

incident he was at Pune which could be ascertained from the statements

recorded during the course of the investigation. He drew attention of the

Court to the order passed by this Court granting regular bail to the co-

accused i.e., his brother in Bail Application No. 1525 of 2024, wherein it

is observed that this is not the case of rape and murder. He also argued

that there are statements recorded during the course of investigation so




ABA-2177-2024 (copy).odt                                             2 of 6
also CDR of the mobile phone of the applicant is collected indicating the

presence of the applicant at Pune, which is at driving distance of about

eight hours from Latur i.e., the place of occurrence of incident. It is his

submission that the liberty of the applicant was protected by order dated

27.01.2025, and he was directed to cooperating the investigation, and

that he has not abused the liberty. He also drew attention of the court to

the statements recorded immediately after the registration of AD,

indicating that this is not the case of murder. He also has a grievance

that statements of the sister of the victim, as well as other girls in the

hospital recorded at the first instance does not attribute any allegation

against the applicant, however, later on they have changed their version.


4.          Learned APP and learned counsel for informant opposed the

application. It is their contention that on the face of it there is evidence

on record to show that the victim girl was sexually abused, as contrary to

different opinions, but one of such indicates so. Similar is the case with

regard to the assault caused on the deceased, as the opinion of one of

the doctor indicates that possibility of such assault is not ruled out. To

support their submissions with regard to the involvement of the applicant

in the crime, reliance is placed on the statement of the sister. Learned

counsel for informant submits that there is no investigation carried out

with regard to the role of the present applicant and as such his custodial




ABA-2177-2024 (copy).odt                                               3 of 6
interrogation is necessary.


5.          Perusal of record indicates that though the offence came to

be registered invoking provisions of Section 302 and 376 of the Indian

Penal Code, admittedly now offence has been charged against the

applicant and not co-accused, punishable under Section 306 of the

Indian Penal Code along with other offences. It would be relevant to take

note of the observations made by this court in order dated 24.09.2026

passed in Bail Application No. 1525 of 2024. Learned APP was asked to

take instructions as to whether the said order has been challenged by

the prosecution or victim. Learned APP, on telephonic instructions from

the Investigating Officer, makes a statement that said order has not been

challenged till date. If it is so, observations made therein would not only

bind the parties but also this court. It would be relevant to take note of

the said paragraph of the said order which is as follows :-

         11. This court has discussed the conduct of the first
         informant. Prosecution did not produce the accidental
         death inquiry papers nor they were able to point out
         that on the date of the incident the mother of the
         applicant made him a phone call. Those documents
         were necessary because the applicant has a specific
         case that he was never taking care of the deceased on
         the contrary, his mother was looking after them since
         they were not residing together. Even if we brush aside
         such arguments, there should be material to
         corroborate his case. At this juncture, the prosecution
         could not point out the other possible evidence.
         Secondly, whether the injuries were caused due to
         dragging or falling from height could be ascertained


ABA-2177-2024 (copy).odt                                              4 of 6
            from the nature of the injuries. But since this is an
            application for bail, it would be inappropriate to
            comment on its probabilities. So far as the fact of
            catheter treatment is concerned, there was no denial.
            Multiple hymenal tears may possibly be caused due to
            catheter treatment. So prima facie, it would be difficult
            to hold at this juncture that it was a case of rape and
            murder. Prima facie evidence is produced on record to
            show that on the date of the incident, the applicant was
            not in the hostel. Both learned APP and learned counsel
            for the victim are correct that it is a matter of
            appreciation of evidence on merit. But before
            determining its legality, law does not bar this court to
            consider such defense. Admittedly, no weapons have
            been used in the crime. The applicant is behind the bar
            for sufficient time. Papers produced before this court by
            the learned APP reveal that the material investigation
            against the applicant is completed. Therefore, this court
            is of the view that detention of the applicant would
            serve no purpose.


6.            Apart from the above observations, charge sheet indicates

that there are statements recorded of witnesses showing that the

incident in question has occurred at around 6 A.M. at Latur, whereas the

applicant was present in Pune, around the same time. Distance between

these two places is about eight hours' drive. Apart from the oral

statement of witnesses, there is also evidence in the form of CDR

indicating presence of the applicant at Pune and not at the place of

incident.


7.            In the light of these facts and also in view of the fact that the

liberty of the applicant was protected prior to one year eight months, he




ABA-2177-2024 (copy).odt                                                  5 of 6
has cooperated with the investigation, there is no grievance on the

prosecution about he misused liberty granted to him. This court,

therefore, finds no justification not to confirm interim relief. Hence,

application stands allowed by confirming interim order dated 27.01.2025.


8.            Fees of appointed counsel is quantified at Rs.10,000/-.




                                                       (R. M. JOSHI, J.)

B. S. Joshi




ABA-2177-2024 (copy).odt                                                6 of 6