Bombay High Court
LAHU GITARAM PHAPALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- SACHIN S DESHMUKH
Holding
The Court granted bail to the applicant on the ground of prima facie over‑implication, lack of direct evidence, and the likelihood of an inordinate delay in trial.
Summary
The applicant, Lahu Gitaram Phapale, was charged with multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, arising from an alleged assault and robbery of an informant on 23.12.2024. The applicant contended that the FIR was the result of an old dispute and that the injuries mentioned in the FIR did not match the injury certificate, arguing that he was over‑implicated. The prosecution argued that eye‑witness statements, a video recording and the nature of the offences indicated the applicant’s involvement as a contract killer. The Court, after reviewing the charge‑sheet and noting the lack of direct material evidence and the mismatch of injury records, held that the case appeared to be one of over‑implication and that the video alone could not justify continued detention. Considering the likely delay in trial due to the number of accused and witnesses, the Court exercised its discretion in favour of the applicant and granted bail with conditions. The order allowed the bail application and directed the applicant to furnish a personal bond and comply with specified conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the evidence on record demonstrates over‑implication and lack of direct material linking the applicant to the alleged crime.
- Whether the anticipated delay in trial justifies the grant of bail.
- Whether a video recording alone can be the basis to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 115(5), 118(1), 118(2), 119(1), 126(2), 140(4), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 238, 324(4), 351(2), 352, 49
Subjects
- bail
- over‑implication
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- under‑trial detention
- evidentiary insufficiency
- trial delay
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:1144
-1-
ba1732.25.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1732 OF 2025 WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3469 OF 2025
IN BA/1732/2025
Lahu Gitaram Phapale ….Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra …..Respondent
Mr. S. S. Jadhav, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. P. P. Dawalkar, APP for the State.
Mr. V. C. Patil, Advocate for the Informant.
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 13th JANUARY, 2026.
PER COURT :
1. Criminal Application No. 3469/2025 is filed seeking leave to
assist the learned APP.
2. Application is allowed. Learned Counsel Mr. Patil is allowed to
assist learned APP.
3. The Applicant seeks regular bail in connection with Crime No.
917/2024 registered with Parner Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar for
the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(1), 118(2), 115(5),
-2-
ba1732.25.odt
115(2), 352, 351(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 324(4),
119(1), 49, 140(4), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
4. In short, the case of the prosecution is that on 23.12.2024 at
about 7.45 pm, when the informant was proceeding towards
Gargundi fata in his car, the Applicant alongwith co-accused and
some unknown persons followed the informant and went ahead of
the vehicle abusing the informant and asked him to take down the
glass of his car. Since the informant did not act as per the say of the
Applicant, the Applicant threatened the informant and suddenly
pelted stone on his car and broke down the glass of the vehicle. It is
further alleged that the Applicant assaulted on the ear of the
informant by pelting stone and co-accused assaulted the informant
on his stomach and head by kicks. It is further alleged that they
snatched gold ornaments, cash and mobile phone along with two
simcards from the informant. On this backdrop, First Information
Report came to be lodged.
5. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that this is a case
of over implication. The First Information Report is the outcome of
old dispute between the parties. Furthermore, the injuries
-3-
ba1732.25.odt
mentioned in the injury certificate do not correspond to the alleged
injuries. The investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has been
filed. As such, no further incarceration of the applicants is
warranted. Hence, the counsel prayed to allow the application.
6. Per contra, learned APP and learned Counsel for the informant
vehemently opposed the Application by contending that the Applicant
and the co-accused are the contract killers. It is contended that
statements of eye witnesses to the alleged incident indicate complicity
of the Applicant in the crime. It is further contended that the video
recording of the alleged incident indicates motive of the Applicant and
his involvement in the crime. Hence, prayed to dismiss the
Application.
7. Considering the submissions of both sides and having perused
the material on record, including the charge-sheet, it is evident that
the complaint is lodged against several persons and consists of
general allegations leveled against all the accused. Prima facie, it
appears to be a case of over-implication. Record further indicates
that the corresponding injuries as alleged in the First Information
Report are absent in the injury certificate. The record further
-4-
ba1732.25.odt
indicates that the present Applicant prima facie has tried to pacify
the scuffle. Thus, in the absence, of direct material, the video
recording cannot be used as the sole basis to withhold the liberty of
the Applicant.
8. The investigation is complete for all intent and purposes.
Resultantly, the chargesheet is filed. Having regard to the number of
the accused and the witnesses which the prosecution proposes to
examine, it is very unlikely that the trial can be commenced and
concluded within a reasonable period. As such, further detention of
the applicant as an under trial prisoner, in the circumstances of the
case does not seem to be either warranted or justifiable. I am,
therefore, persuaded to exercise the discretion in favor of the
applicant.
9. Hence, the following order :-
ORDER
(i) Application is allowed.
(ii) Applicant Lahu Gitaram Phapale , be released on bail,
on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty
Thousand) with one or two local solvent sureties, in the like
-5-
ba1732.25.odt
amount, in connection with Crime No. 917/2024 registered
with Parner Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar for the offences
punishable under Sections 109, 118(1), 118(2), 115(5),
115(2), 352, 351(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 126(2),
324(4), 119(1), 49, 140(4), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, on the following conditions :-
(a) The Applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution
witnesses and tamper with the prosecution evidence, in
any manner.
(b) The Applicant shall attend the trial on each and
every date unless exempted by the Trial Court and shall
not leave the area of jurisdiction of the concerned Police
Station till conclusion of the trial.
(c) The Applicant shall submit Aadhar and Pan Cards
to the Investigating Officer and detailed address and
phone numbers of the Applicant and two of the near
relatives.
(d) In case of breach of any of the conditions by the
Applicant, it is open for the prosecution to move this
Court seeking cancellation of bail.
(iii) Needless to state that the observations rendered
herein are to the extent of this Application and the Trial
Court shall not be influenced by the same.
(SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.)
dyb
Checking your session…