JALAMSING SOMA PADVIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2026:BHC-AUG:37135
                                               -1-
                                                                     44-BA-1148-2026

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1148 OF 2026
              Jalamsing Soma Padvi
              Aged : 35 years, Occu. : Agriculture,
              R/o. Maliamba Morkhi,
              Tq. Akkalkuwa, Dist. Nandurbad                       … Applicant
                                                                     (Accused)
                         Versus

              The State of Maharashtra,
              Through the Police Station Officer,
              Akkalkuwa Police Station,
              Dist. Nandurbar.                                     … Respondent
                                                            (Orig. Complainant filed
                                                            through Jaysing Olya Vasave)

                                              ......
              Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Aashish T. Jadhavar
              APP for Respondent - State : Mr. D. J. Patil
                                              .....

                                          CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                                          DATED : 17th AUGUST 2026
              ORDER :

              1.         The present applicant seeks regular bail in connection

              with Crime No.13 of 2025, registered with Akkalkuwa Police

              Station, District Nandurbar, for the offences punishable under

              Sections 103(1), 115(2), 351(2), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya

              Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).



              2.         The record indicates that the applicant was arrested on

              24th January 2025. The investigation is complete and the charge-

              sheet has been filed and the case has been registered as Sessions

              Case No. 53 of 2025. The prosecution case, stated in brief, concerns
                                 -2-
                                                      44-BA-1148-2026

the homicidal death of a woman by named Laxmi Vasave and her

dead body was found near the Bognai river, in the vicinity of village

Morkhi on 17th January, 2025. The medical record indicates that

the death is caused due to blunt force trauma to the head. The First

Information Report has been lodged by the brother of deceased on

19th January, 2025. In the First Information Report, suspicion was

initially expressed against husband of deceased on the allegation

that he doubted on the character of deceased and have assaulted

and threatened to kill her. In the said First Information Report, the

applicant was not named.



3.         During the investigation, the supplementary statement

of brother i.e. complainant was recorded on 27 th January, 2025,

and in the same statement, the present applicant came to be

implicated on the allegation that deceased had gone to meet him

and that they had an intimate relationship. Thereafter, when the

deceased insisted that the applicant should marry her, the

applicant assaulted her by banging her head against a stone. The

prosecution case is entirely circumstantial, and therefore, requires

careful examination to find out whether the material discloses

reasonable prima facie nexus between the applicant and the crime.
                                   -3-
                                                       44-BA-1148-2026

4.          The learned Advocate appearing for applicant submits

that applicant has been implicated only by way of an improvement

after the registration of crime, in the supplementary statement.

The learned Advocate placed reliance on the statement of mother

of deceased recorded on 19th January, 2025, wherein she has

stated that on 15th January, 2025, at about 1:00 p.m., while she

was passing through village Morkhi, she saw the deceased from a

distance at her matrimonial house. The learned Advocate,

therefore argued that this assertion is incompatible with the

prosecution's allegation which emerges from the alleged extra-

judicial confession that the deceased was killed on the night of 14 th

January, 2025. He further submitted that there is no eye-witness

or any reliable last seen evidence to connect the present applicant

with the alleged crime. He also submitted that the call records

establish nothing but the acquaintance of the applicant with the

deceased. There is no forensic report that conclusively connects

the present applicant with the deceased or with the place of

occurrence. He argued that alleged extrajudicial confession of the

applicant to one of the prosecution witnesses is absolutely

uncorroborated and therefore the same cannot be relied upon and

needs to be proved in the trial.



5.          The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the
                                  -4-
                                                      44-BA-1148-2026

application and submitted that the frequency of telephonic contact

between applicant and deceased and in particular, several calls

between the present applicant and the deceased on 14 th January,

2025 establishes that the applicant and deceased were in contact

with each other on the date of the incident. Even the location of the

applicant, on the basis of mobile tower, shows that the applicant

was in the vicinity where the alleged incident of killing the

deceased took place. He argued that the statement of the

prosecution witness Rasikbhai stating that the applicant had

confessed to the alleged offence is an important and credible piece

of evidence which needs to be taken into consideration at this stage

when the application for bail is being considered. The other crucial

piece of evidence is the discovery of the alleged place of assault at

the instance of present applicant himself and recovery of the shawl

belonging to the deceased from the said place. According to the

prosecution, these circumstances when read together, furnish a

strong prima facie case and the inconsistencies relied upon by the

applicant require evaluation at the trial.



6.         I have heard both learned advocates and have also

perused the entire investigation papers with the assistance of the

learned counsel. Before proceeding to consider the investigation

papers, it is necessary to refer to the order of Sessions Court,
                                   -5-
                                                       44-BA-1148-2026

which records that applicant and deceased had exchanged 584

calls during the preceding six months. It further refers to the 8

calls made from the telephone used by the deceased and one call by

the applicant on 14th January, 2025. The charge-sheet also

contains material upon which the prosecution seeks to place the

applicant in the vicinity of the house of deceased and relevant

location during relevant period. The call details and the tower

location records cannot, by themselves, establish either the

contents of the conversation or the commission of murder.

Nevertheless, at the stage of bail, the number and proximity of

calls are relevant corroborative circumstances which require to be

considered along with the other pieces of evidence on record.



7.          The   statement   of    prosecution   witness   Rasikbhai

specifically states that applicant had worked for him and used to

contact him from his mobile bearing number 9834671087.

According to this witness, applicant met him on 18 th January,

2025 near a hotel and stated that he had maintained physical

relations with a woman from his village and had killed her on the

night of 14th January, 2025, and therefore, urgently required some

financial help.



8.          At this stage, statement of Rasikbhai will have to be
                                -6-
                                                      44-BA-1148-2026

taken into consideration and cannot be discarded altogether

merely because the alleged confession was made to a private

person or because independent electronic corroboration was made

to a private person. Its truthfulness and voluntariness will have to

be tested at the trial.



9.          The discoveries in the nature of panchanama which is

at page nos. 70 to 72 of the police paper concerns the place where

the dead body was found. Under subsequent memorandum and

discovery panchanama, the applicant is alleged to have led the

police to another place which, according to prosecution, was the

precise place of assault. At the place of assault, the recovery of

shawl, which has been identified by the relatives of deceased as

belonging to deceased, was recovered from that place. Thus, the

prosecution case that the place at which the body was found was

known and disclosed by the applicant and also the place of assault

along with the recovery of shawl of deceased, constitutes a

circumstance which cannot be ignored at this stage.



10.         Even at this stage, the conduct of applicant after the

alleged incident has occurred is material to be noted. In order to

show applicant's conduct after the occurrence of incident, the

prosecution relies upon the statements of prosecution witnesses,
                                    -7-
                                                           44-BA-1148-2026

which state that he remained absent from his usual place of work

and upon his alleged statements and movements in the days

following the discovery of body.



11.         On   such       cumulative    consideration,   the   material

presently comprises sustained and unusually frequent contact

between the applicant and deceased, several calls during the

material period, the tower location of the applicant, which has been

obtained by the prosecution from the mobile company, the alleged

extrajudicial confession made soon after the body was found, the

applicant's alleged post occurrence conduct and importantly, the

discovery of the precise place of assault and recovery of identified

shawl of deceased from that place are sufficient to prima facie come

to a conclusion that the applicant is involved in the commission of

the alleged offence of killing the deceased.



12.         The nature of the accusation, the prima facie material

connecting the applicant with the deceased immediately before the

occurrence, the alleged attempt of the applicant to obtain money

after the occurrence and the fact that material witnesses belonging

to the same local area are relevant considerations while deciding

the application for bail.
                                      -8-
                                                        44-BA-1148-2026

13.         The application is therefore rejected.



14.         Considering the period already undergone by applicant

in custody, the Sessions Court shall endeavour to proceed with

Sessions Case No. 53 of 2025 as expeditiously as possible and

conclude the trial at the earliest.



15.         If the trial does not make substantial progress within a

reasonable period of one year from today for reasons not

attributable to the applicant, then it will be open for the applicant

to renew the request for bail on the ground of prolonged

incarceration without substantial progress in the trial.



                                            (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR)
                                                   JUDGE




Tandale