SHIVSHANKAR HARIBHAU INGALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                   (1)
                                         Cri. Appln No. 4159-2025.odt
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

          CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4159 OF 2025
           IN CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 839 of 2025

           SHIVSHANKAR S/O HARIBHAU INGALE
                           VERSUS
                THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                               ….
  Advocate for the applicant : Adv. Pratik A. Bhosale a/w Adv.
                        Amol B. Chalak
     A.P.P. for Respondent/State : Mrs. Bharati B. Gunjal
                               ….

                  CORAM :     SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE AND
                              ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.

                  RESERVING ON : FEBRUARY 05, 2026
                  PRONOUNCING ON : FEBRUARY 06, 2026
ORDER:-

1.      Heard rival submissions.

2.      By this application, the applicant, who is the original

accused No.2     in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2022, is seeking

suspension of his substantive sentence of life imprisonment,

during the pendency of this appeal and also his release on

bail.


3.       As per the prosecution story, one Krushna, who is the

son of informant (P.W.1) had hired a vehicle on 18.11.2021 for

coming from Chapoli to Osmanabad and thereafter, from

Dhoki to Osmanabad, went on missing after having last

conversation with the informant on phone at 8.00 p.m.            On
                               (2)
                                         Cri. Appln No. 4159-2025.odt
19.11.2021, the informant lodged missing report. However,

thereafter, it was traced out that the present applicant, along

with other two accused, committed murder of Krushna.


4.   The learned counsel for the applicant submits that, the

entire material on record indicates involvement of accused Nos.

1 and 3 only, but there is no whisper about the involvement of

this applicant by any of the witnesses. On the contrary, he

submits that the learned Trial Judge convicted the applicant

merely on the basis of his confessional statement recorded by

the learned Judicial Magistrate, wherein he had not even

stated anything incriminating. He further submits that during

the trial also the applicant was on bail and said bail was

granted by this Court only, by observing that there was no

prima facie material against him about his involvement.



5.   On the contrary, the learned A.P.P. strongly supported

the conviction of the applicant/accused and submitted that,

the learned Trial Judge after considering the entire material on

record, has convicted him, and therefore, now there is no case

made out by the applicant for his release on bail.


6.   Admittedly, the learned Trial Judge has convicted the

present applicant along with other two accused, for the offence
                                (3)
                                            Cri. Appln No. 4159-2025.odt
under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the

Indian   Penal   Code   and   sentenced     them     to   suffer    life

imprisonment.     However, on going through the material on

record and the impugned judgment, it appears that the

learned Trial Judge has observed the involvement of this

applicant in the crime merely on the basis of evidence of

P.W.13 and Exhibit 93, which is his confessional statement,

recorded by the concerned learned Judicial Magistrate.

However, on going through the said confessional statement, it

is evident that nothing incriminating has been stated by him,

which can connect him with the crime. Only it has come on

record in the said statement that he was in the pickup along

with other two accused and when they started from Kaij, he

slept in the said pick-up and when he got up, he saw one

additional passenger sitting in the said pickup vehicle and

thereafter he again slept in the vehicle.



7.   It is also significant to note that there is no eye witness to

the incident and while releasing the applicant on bail during

the trial, this Court under order 19.04.2023, had specifically

observed that except the statement of co-accused, which is

inadmissible, there was no incriminating material against this

applicant. It was also observed that he was not lastly seen in
                                  (4)
                                            Cri. Appln No. 4159-2025.odt
the company of the deceased and the sole witness i.e. Auto

Rickshaw driver also did not identify him in the Test

Identification parade. Under such circumstances, there is no

prima facie material on record to show his involvement in the

crime. He was on bail during the trial. Considering all these

aspects, we pass following order :-

                        ORDER

(A)    The application is allowed.

(B)    The substantive sentence of           imprisonment of life
       imposed upon     the    applicant/accused     Shivshankar
       Haribhau Ingale in Sessions Case No. 102 of 2022 under
       judgment and order dated 18.09.2025 passes by the
       learned Additional Sessions Judge-3, Dharashiv
       (Osmanabad)     is     hereby    suspended    during     the
       pendency of this appeal.


(C)    The applicant is released on execution of P.R. Bond of Rs.
       25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one
       surety in the like amount.


(D)    The application is accordingly disposed of.



(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE)                    (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE)
      JUDGE                                     JUDGE


YSK/