ROHIT ALIAS ROHIDAS DADASAHEB JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                1                      929BA1223.2026.odt

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD
               929 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1223 OF 2026
                  Rohit Alias Rohidas Dadasaheb Jadhav
                                 VERSUS
                        The State Of Maharashtra
                                     ...
Mr. Hanumant P. Jadhav - Advocate (Through Legal Aid) for Applicant
Mr. V. K. Kotecha - APP for the State
                                     ...
                          CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                          DATED :        10TH SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :

1.          Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant and the

learned APP for the State. With the assistance of both of them, I have

perused the Charge-sheet annexed to the present Application.


2.          The present Applicant was arrested on 12.02.2023 in

connection with C.R. No. 0087 of 2023 registered with Dhule Taluka

Police Station, Dhule, for the offences punishable under Section 302 and

201 of the Indian Penal Code.


3.          It is the prosecution case that the Informant was engaged in

the business of land levelling by utilising his Tractor. The present

Applicant was the driver of the said Tractor. There were other owners

who, together, used to look for work relating to land levelling.

Therefore, while they were in the process of obtaining work for land

levelling by visiting several farmers and agricultural fields, on the date

of the incident, it is alleged that the present Applicant and the deceased

had proceeded to look for such work.
                               2                       929BA1223.2026.odt

4.          On the said date, in the night, while under the influence of

liquor, the deceased made a telephone call to the Informant, stating that

the present Applicant was quarrelling with him and demanding his

money. Thereafter, in the morning, the Informant was informed by

Santosh Shendge that the dead body of the deceased was lying in an

agricultural field. When the Informant reached the spot where the dead

body was lying, he found that the deceased had sustained injuries and

that the Tractor which he had taken along with him was parked nearby.

The Applicant was not found anywhere. Therefore, on the basis of the

quarrel reported by the deceased on the previous night and also by

applying the theory of last seen together, the present Applicant has been

arraigned as an accused in the present case.


5.          The learned APP submits that four witnesses have already

been examined and that Witness Nos. 5 and 6 have already been

summoned. He thus submits that the trial has substantially progressed

and, at this stage, releasing the Applicant would not be appropriate. The

learned Advocate for the Applicant, however, submits that the Applicant

has been in jail since 12.02.2023 and that, in case this Court is of the

opinion that the trial can be concluded within a period of one (1) year

from today, the present Application may be disposed of with liberty to

the Applicant to prefer another Application after the expiry of one (1)

year.
                                                             3                         929BA1223.2026.odt

                             6.           Though I have perused the entire case papers, without

                             expressing any opinion on the merits of the Application, I am of the view

                             that it would be appropriate to allow the trial, which has already

                             substantially progressed, to continue without releasing the Applicant at

                             this stage. The learned Trial Court is requested to conclude the trial

                             within a period of one (1) year from today.


                             7.           In case no substantial progress is made in the trial for any

                             reason, the Applicant shall be at liberty to file a fresh application upon

                             expiry of the said period. In case such an application is preferred, the

                             same shall be decided on its own merits, taking into consideration the

                             substantial progress achieved from the date of this order till the date of

                             filing of such application, as well as the merits of the matter.


                             8.           In view of the above, the Application, as on date, stands

                             dismissed.


                             9.           The fees of the learned Advocate appointed through Legal

                             Aid, is quantified at Rs. 10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand only], which

                             shall be paid by the High Court Legal Services Sub Committee,

                             Aurangabad Bench.



                                                                      [ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ]
                                                                               JUDGE

                             SG Punde

Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 11/09/2026 15:50:17