Bombay High Court
MUKESH ANIL MAGARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Rejected
Holding
Bail was denied because the accused’s violation of the externment order and his extensive serious antecedents precluded the grant of bail.
Summary
Mukesh Anil Magar applied for bail under Section 439 of the CrPC for offences including murder (Section 302 IPC) and drug offences, alleging that a prior bail granted to a co-accused in a similar case should be a guiding factor. The State contended that the applicant had violated an externment order by entering Nashik district and committing the crime, and highlighted five prior convictions for serious offences. The prosecution’s case described the applicant, along with co-accused, assaulting and stabbing a victim who later died, and detailed the antecedents involving murder, robbery and NDPS violations. The trial court noted that the earlier bail application had been withdrawn and that the applicant’s extensive criminal history and breach of the externment order negated any merit for bail. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the bail application, emphasizing that the trial court must decide the case on its own merits without reliance on the observations made.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 439 of the CrPC despite a breach of an externment order and multiple serious antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 120B, 153, 212, 25(4), 302, 323, 324, 326, 34, 341, 364, 427, 504, 506
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 27, 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- Section 439
- externment order
- antecedents
- murder
- NDPS Act
- criminal procedure
- serious offences
Judgment
12 BA-199-2026.DOC
skt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 199 OF 2026
Mukesh Anil Magar …Applicant
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Anr. …Respondents
Mr. Mandaar Goswami a/w. Mr. Siddhant Choudhari, for the
Applicant.
Mr.S.V. Walve,APP for the Respondent-State.
Ms. Rekha Musale, for Respondent No.2.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the
Applicant, Ms. Musale, learned counsel appearing for Respondent
No. 2 and Mr. Walve, learned APP appearing for the State.
2. This is the second bail application preferred under Section
439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The relevant details
of the case are given as under :-
1. C.R. No. 516 of 2023
2. Date of registration of FIR 17/08/2023
3. Name of Police Station Ambad, District-Nashik
302, 504, 506, 34 &
4. Section/s invoked in FIR 25(4) of the Indian
Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
5. Section/s applied in Charge- 302, 212, 120B, 504,
Page 1 of 5
31st August, 2026
12 BA-199-2026.DOC
skt
506 & 34 of the Indian
sheet
Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
6. Date of incident 17/08/2023
7. Date of arrest 18/08/2023
8. Date of filing of Charge-sheet 03/11/2023
3. It is the submission of the Mr. Goswami, learned counsel
appearing for the Applicant that this Court had granted bail to the
Applicant -Ravindra Shantaram Aher (Accused No. 4) by order
dated 5th August, 2024 passed in Criminal Application No. 2749 of
2024 and the role of the present Applicant is similar to that of said
Ravindra Aher.
4. On the other hand, Ms. Musale, learned counsel appearing
for Respondent No. 2, and Mr. Walve, learned APP state that the
Applicant has committed the offence by breaching the externment
order which was operating against the Applicant at the relevant
time. It is further submitted that there are total five antecedents,
including offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985.
5. The prosecution case is set out in paragraph No. 2 of the
order dated 9th September, 2024 passed by learned Additional
Page 2 of 5
31st August, 2026
12 BA-199-2026.DOC
skt
Sessions Judge, Nashik below Exhibit 12 in Sessions Case No. 5 of
2024, which reads as under :
“2. It is alleged by the informant Arun Vairagar that on
17.8.2023 at about 2:30 pm informant himself and his
friend Mayur, Tushar Kute, Peer Attar, Piyush Nitare had
been to the court and thereafter they were came at Samaj
Mandir, Swami Nagar. There at about 2:30 pm co-accused
Karan Kaduskar, applicant Mukesh Magar and co-accused
Ravi Aher came on Splendor motorcycle. Applicant Mukesh
Magar and co-accused Karan Kaduskar having sharp
weapon on their waist. Co-accused Karan demanded
money to Mayur Datir for liquor, on that count, argument
took place between them. Similarly on count of earlier
amount exchange of words took place between them due
to which co-accused Karan got angry. Co-accused Karan
started to abuse Datir and took out sharp edge weapon
(Chopper) on his waist and stabbed the Chopper for 5 to 6
times to Mayur Datir due to which Mayur Datir severely
injured. Informant attempted to save Mayur Datir but co-
accused Karan Kaduskar and applicant Mukesh Magar gave
threat to kill. After that Karan Kaduskar, applicant Mukesh
Magar and co-accused Ravi Aher ran away from spot on
motorcycle. People gathered on spot and took Mayur to the
hospital for treatment but doctor declared him dead. After
that, informant approached to Ambad police station and
Page 3 of 5
31st August, 2026
12 BA-199-2026.DOC
skt
lodged the report. On that basis, crime registration no. 516
of 2023 came to be registered.”
6. Perusal of the record shows that the crime has been
committed by the present Applicant when he was externed from
District Nashik and by violating the said order, he has entered
District Nashik and committed the crime. There are total five
antecedents against the Applicant (Accused No. 3) as per the
following details :-
Sr.
Police Station F.I.R. No. Sections
No.
Satpura Police 302, 364, 323, r/w 34 of
1 153 of 2018
Station, Nashik IPC
Satpura Police 341, 324, 323, 504, 506,
2 290 of 2020
Station, Nashik 427 r/w 34 of IPC
Satpura Police 324, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34
3 81 of 2021
Station, Nashik of IPC
Satpura Police
4 122 of 2021 8(c) r/w 27 of NDPS
Station, Nashik
Satpura Police
5 02 of 2023 326 r/w 34 of IPC
Station, Nashik
Thus, the antecedents include very serious crime of murder under
Section 302 of IPC and also under N.D.P.S. Act.
7. The earlier Bail Application has been withdrawn as no case
is made out for grant of bail on merits. This is the second Bail
Application.
Page 4 of 5
31st August, 2026
12 BA-199-2026.DOC
skt
8. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances, no case is made
out for grant of bail. The bail application is dismissed.
9. The observations in this order are made for considering the
present Bail Application. The learned Trial Court shall not be
influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove and shall
decide the case on its own merits.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 5 of 5
31st August, 2026
Checking your session…