Bombay High Court
OMKAR KRUSHAN MAGARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail is granted to the applicant subject to the conditions specified by the court.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Omkar Krushna Magar under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with CR No. 366 of 2025, which alleged his involvement in a crime by providing a mobile phone, SIM card and a vehicle to co‑accused after the incident. The prosecution alleged political rivalry as a motive but failed to produce prima facie evidence directly linking the applicant to the offence. The applicant had been incarcerated for over eight months, had no prior criminal record, and his wife had recently given birth. The court noted that the charge‑sheet did not sufficiently demonstrate his participation or conspiracy and therefore found a case for bail. Consequently, bail was granted subject to a series of conditions, and the court clarified that its observations were limited to bail and not on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the prosecution has established prima facie evidence of the applicant's participation or conspiracy to warrant denial of bail under Section 483 B.N.S., 2023.
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused given the nature and seriousness of the charges and the political context.
- Whether the conditions imposed on bail are appropriate and sufficient to ensure the applicant's compliance with the trial process.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25, 3, 4
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 189(1), 189(4), 190, 191(3), 238(a), 249, 49, 58, 61(2)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 — s. 135, 37(1)(3)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- prima facie evidence
- political rivalry
- Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- multiple offences
- Arms Act
- Maharashtra Police Act
- conditions of bail
Judgment
36.BA.2475.2026.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.2475 OF 2026
Omkar Krushna Magar .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Veerdhawal Deshmukh a/w. Mr. Ameyprasad Atigre, Advocates
for Applicant.
Mr. Sukanta A. Karmakar, APP for Respondent – State.
Mr. Kuldeep Patil a/w. Ms. Saili Dhuru and Mr. Anay Joshi,
Advocates for Original Complainant / Intervenor.
Dr. Vishal Nehul, Dy.S.P., SDPU, Khalapur.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 08, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Deshmukh, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr.
Karmakar, learned APP for Respondent and Mr. Patil, learned
Advocate for Original Complainant / Intervenor.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R.
No.366 of 2025 registered with Khopoli Police Station for offences
punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 189(1), 189(4), 190,
191(3), 238(a), 49, 58, 249 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860; Sections 3, 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959;
Sections 37(1)(3) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
1 of 5
36.BA.2475.2026.doc
3. At the outset, Mr. Deshmukh submits that the name of the
Applicant is required to be corrected as ‘Omkar Krushna’. He would
submit that inadvertently, the name ‘Krushna’ is incorrectly stated as
‘Krushan’. Amendment is permitted to be carried out forthwith in the
presence of the Court. Amendment is carried out by Mr. Deshmukh. It
is permitted and endorsed by the Court. Re-verification stands
dispensed with.
4. On 29.08.2026, after hearing the Applicant and the
Complainant’s Advocates the following order was passed:-
“1. I have heard Mr. Deshmukh, learned Advocate appearing for
Applicant. The Applicant seeks bail. He has one of the accused person
in the crime. According to Mr. Deshmukh, involvement of the
Applicant on the date and time of the incident is not evident at all.
He would submit that his indictment is on the basis of the charge that
he provided one mobile phone, one SIM card and a vehicle
(Mahindra Thar) registered in his name to the other co-accused
persons after commission of the crime. Though at first blush it may
appear very simple but there are always contours and overtures to
such kind of incidents. The reason and motive for providing the three
above things needs to be seen or investigated to prima facie
determine the complicity of Applicant. The prosecutor prima facie
submits that this being a political fallout, he would like to the
appropriate instructions from the I.O. who is not present today with
regards to the extent of intent or involvement of the Applicant.
2. Mr. Patil appearing on behalf of the complainant would submit
that he would also take appropriate instructions and since he has
been asked to appear for the first time today, he has requested the
Court to adjourn the matter. Applicant is incarcerated for more than
8 months. Applicant is 29 years old and has no antecedents.
Applicant’s wife has delivered a child in the month of March this year
and he has not seen the face of the baby as yet as apprised by Mr.
Deshmukh.
3. Mr. Deshmukh would further submit that the Applicant has
been successfully running a business of land development in Raigad
area. I direct the prosecution to take appropriate instructions qua the
material which has been collected and point out the precise role of
the Applicant or attributed to the Applicant by prosecution to the
extent of his involvement in the present crime.
2 of 5
36.BA.2475.2026.doc
4. In view of the request made by Mr. Deshmukh, the present
application will be treated as a part-heard and will be heard on 8 th
September 2026.”
5. The prosecution is armed with instructions today. However,
with regard to the directions and specific case noted by the Court qua
provision made of the three things by the Applicant to the other co-
accused person after commission of the crime, the same is not being
amplified further with reasons at all.
6. There is no doubt when Mr. Patil submits that the incident in
question occurred 15 days after the elections were over and there was
a political rivalry between two groups which may have possibly led to
the unfortunate incident but to link the Applicant’s specific role from
the material that is collected by the prosecution and the charge-sheet
which is filed, save and except what is stated in paragraph No.1 of the
previous order his complicity or he being one of the conspirators would
have to be shown by the prosecution either directly or indirectly from
the record. That not having been shown, the applicant has made out a
case for grant of bail.
7. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant is granted bail subject
to following conditions:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with Crime No. 366 of 2025;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
3 of 5
36.BA.2475.2026.doc
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty
Thousand only) with one or two surety / sureties of the
like amount;
(iii) Applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Khopoli
until the conclusion of the trial;
(iv) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at the
concerned Police Station, once every month on the first
Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00
p.m.;
(v) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and
attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically
exempted and will not take any unnecessary
adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the
prosecution to apply for revocation of this order;
(vi) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vii) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(viii)Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of his current address and mobile contact number and /
or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from
time to time, as applicable; and
(ix) Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation
4 of 5
36.BA.2475.2026.doc
of bail granted to the Applicant.
8. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are
limited for the purpose of granting Bail only and I have not made any
observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on
the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being
uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made
hereinabove in this order.
9. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
HARSHADA by HARSHADA
HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date: 2026.09.08
15:05:15 +0530
5 of 5
Checking your session…