Bombay High Court
GANESH SAHEBRAO RAHATEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant, finding no prima facie evidence sufficient to deny bail.
Summary
The applicant, Ganesh Sahebrao Rahate, was charged with murder and related offences under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the killing of a man on 21 December 2023. The prosecution relied on CCTV footage showing the applicant and co‑accused entering the victim’s house, carrying a wrapped body, and argued that he was part of the conspiracy and could tamper with witnesses. The defence contended that the applicant’s vehicle was hired by a co‑accused, he was not present at the disposal of the body, has no prior criminal record, and has been in custody for over two years awaiting trial. The judge examined the charge‑sheet, CCTV evidence and the arguments, finding that the prosecution had not conclusively established the applicant’s precise role or motive. Consequently, the court granted regular bail with a bond of Rs. 30,000, a surety, and strict conditions, while noting that the order was limited to bail and not a determination on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail despite CCTV evidence suggesting his involvement in the murder.
- Whether the risk of the applicant absconding or tampering with witnesses justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 201, 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- IPC 201
- IPC 34
- CCTV evidence
- prima facie
- criminal procedure
Judgment
41-BA-3213-26.doc
rsk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.3213 OF 2026
Ganesh Sahebrao Rahate .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Vipul Dushing a/w. Mr. Ashraf Kazi for Applicant.
Ms. Rajeshree V. Newton, APP for the Respondent-State.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 31, 2026
P.C.:
1. By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime
No. 632 of 2023 registered with Paud Police Station, District Pune, for
the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2.It is prosecution's case that on 21st December 2023, the applicant
and co-accused murdered the deceased on the ground that the
deceased was in a live-in relationship with accused No. 6- Dolly Pereira
and used to assault her. Due to continuous harassment by the deceased
to accused No. 6, it is alleged that the applicant and co-accused
Digitally signed
by RAJESHWARI
RAJESHWARI SUBODH
SUBODH KARVE
KARVE Date:
2026.09.01
15:27:10 +0530
murdered the deceased and disposed of his body by throwing it in
Tamhini Ghat. It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that
the applicant was arrested on the basis of suspicion and on the grounds
that, his wagon car was taken on hire by Mina Rajput, member of
1 of 4
41-BA-3213-26.doc
Pereira family. It is prima facie seen that the applicant has no concern
with the said incident. Learned counsel for the applicant further
submitted that when the body was disposed of at Tamhini Ghat, the
applicant was not present. The applicant has no antecedents. He is
behind bars for two years and three months, it may take time to
conclude the trial and hence he has requested to allow the application.
3. It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for the
first informant that the incident of entering into the house of the
deceased by the applicant and co-accused is captured in CCTV footage.
It is argue that in the CCTV footage, the applicant and co-accused are
seen carrying the wrapped body of the deceased in a bed-sheet and
keeping it in a vehicle.
4. It is further argued that the applicant was present with the
principal co-accused throughout the entire incident. It shows his
involvement in the crime. The statement of witness shows that the
applicant was part of the conspiracy to kill the deceased and if the
applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the
prosecution witnesses and therefore Court is requested to reject the
application.
5. I have heard all the learned counsel, perused the charge-sheet and
documents produced on record. The CCTV footage shows the presence
of the applicant with the co-accused entering into the house of the
2 of 4
41-BA-3213-26.doc
deceased and returning from his house. The allegations of disposing of
the dead body are against accused Nos. 1 to 4. It is contention of
learned counsel for the applicant that the wagon car of the applicant
was hired by the co-accused. The applicant has no antecedents. To
prove the complicity and role of the applicant, trial is required. Prima
facie the precise role and motive ascribed to the Applicant is not
brought forth by the prosecution. Hence, the applicant is behind bars
for more than two years and three months. The considering these facts,
I pass the following order:
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with Crime No. 632 of 2023;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rs. Thirty
Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount;
(iii) 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.;
(iv) 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
3 of 4
41-BA-3213-26.doc
prosecution to apply for revocation of this order;
(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi)Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses or
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) 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
(viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation
of bail granted to the Applicant.
6. 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.
7. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
rsk [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
4 of 4
Checking your session…