Bombay High Court
PRADIP BABASAHEB SUKASEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
- Bench
- SHAILESH P BRAHME
Holding
The court held that no prima facie case exists against the applicant and therefore granted bail.
Summary
Pradip, a 19‑year‑old labourer, applied for bail in a case (Cr. No. 296/2025) alleging offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He was said to have accompanied the main accused, Ritesh, and fled the scene. The defence argued that statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita did not attribute any overt act, weapon use, or common intention to Pradip, and that the prosecution’s evidence was limited to eye‑witnesses and CDR/SDR records. The court examined the witness statements and found no incriminating role for the applicant, concluding that a prima facie case for detention was absent. Consequently, the bail application was allowed on condition of a cash bond and surety, with directions not to tamper with witnesses and to furnish contact details to the investigating officer.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant's presence and participation in the alleged offence can be established on the basis of the evidence presented.
- Whether the existence of a prima facie case justifies continued detention pending trial.
- Whether the statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita exonerate the applicant from liability.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita — s. 180, 183
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- prima facie case
- statutory statements
- CDR
- SDR
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bhartiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:12711
1 928 ba 313.26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 313 OF 2026
Pradip S/o Babasaheb Sukase,
Age : 19 Years, Occu. : Labour,
R/o Zenda Ground, Waluj,
Tq. Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad. .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
Shri Nilesh S. Ghanekar, Advocate for the Applicant.
Shri A. R. Kale, Addl.P.P. for the Respondent – State.
CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 24TH MARCH, 2026.
FINAL ORDER :
. Heard both sides. Applicant is seeking enlargement on bail
in furtherence of offence bearing Cr. No. 296/2025 registered
with Waluj Police Station, Aurangabad for the offences
punishable U/Sec. 103(1), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant Mr. Ghanekar submits
that there is no incriminating role pitted against the applicant
except that he was accompanying the main perpetrator – Ritesh
Narwade at the relevant time and he is alleged to have fled
away. It is submitted that statements recorded U/Sec. 183 of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita (for the sake of brevity and
2 928 ba 313.26
convenience hereinafter referred as to the “B. N. S. S.”) of Vikas
Raosaheb Manal and Sujit Devghatole and their statements
U/Sec. 180 of the B. N. S. S. would disclose that no overt act, use
of weapon or any express aid in commission of crime can be
attributable to the applicant. It is contended that rivalry was in
between deceased and accused No. 1 – Ritesh.
3. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Kale
submits that there are eye witnesses and incriminating material
against the applicant. His presence cannot be ruled out at the
relevant time. Besides that CDR and SDR would corroborate the
prosecution case and indicate common intention.
4. The incident took place on 08.10.2025. Applicant is
arrested on 09.10.2025. Charge sheet is filed on 01.01.2026.
After filing of charge sheet, this is first bail application.
5. First information report discloses that there was some
rivalry between deceased Prathamesh and accused No. 1 –
Ritesh. They were friends. They were knowing each other.
Report is lodged by the father of the deceased, who learnt about
the incident and assault from Sujit Devghatole and Vikas Manal.
6. I have gone through the statements of Sujit and Vikas
recorded U/Sec. 180 as well as U/Sec. 183 of the B. N. S. S. The
presence of the applicant is not spelt out in the statement of
Vikas recorded U/Sec. 180 of the B. N. S. S. The statements of
3 928 ba 313.26
the witnesses would reveal presence of the applicant along with
accused No. 1. No incriminating role is attributed to the
applicant either for actual commission of offence or for sharing
any common intention or helping the main perpetrator. Prima
facie case is made out for grant of bail to the applicant.
7. The purport of the C.D.R. and S.D.R. collected during the
course of investigation would be taken into consideration during
the course of the trial. The investigation is over. There is no
reason to detain the applicant behind the bar any further. I,
therefore, pass following order.
ORDER
A. The bail application is allowed.
B. Applicant – Pradip S/o Babasaheb Sukase shall be released
on bail in respect of Cr. No. 296/2025 registered with Waluj
Police Station, Aurangabad for the offences punishable U/Sec.
103(1), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on condition of
furnishing P. R. bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousands
only) with one solvent surety of like amount.
C. The applicant shall not tamper or contact with the
prosecution witnesses.
D. He shall furnish his mobile/cell number and details of his
whereabouts to the Investigating Officer.
4 928 ba 313.26
E. Bail application is disposed of.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ]
bsb/March 26
Checking your session…