Bombay High Court
ROSHAN @ MAYUR RAJESH PATHADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicant under Section 439 CRPC, subject to conditions, as the prosecution failed to demonstrate a specific role in the offence despite a prior antecedent.
Summary
The applicant, Roshan @ Mayur Rajesh Pathade, was arrested as Accused No.2 in a case involving offences under Sections 302, 323, 504, 143, 148 and 149 of the IPC arising from an altercation at a grocery store. The prosecution could not establish his precise participation in the assault, only that he was present with the other accused. The learned magistrate considered the prima facie evidence, the applicant’s two‑year‑four‑month pre‑trial detention, and a single antecedent against him. Relying on earlier judicial pronouncements on bail, the court held that the lack of a specific role warranted his release on bail. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to a cash bond, surety, reporting requirements, and other standard conditions, without prejudice to the trial on the merits.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate exercise of discretion under Section 439 of the CRPC in granting bail to an accused whose role in the alleged offence is not specifically established?
- Does the existence of a prior antecedent against the accused preclude the grant of bail in the present case?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 143, 148, 149, 302, 323, 504
Subjects
- bail
- Section 439 CRPC
- IPC offences
- murder
- attempted murder
- assault
- criminal conspiracy
- antecedent
- pre‑trial detention
- conditions of bail
Judgment
8. BA 3337-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3337 OF 2026
Roshan @ Mayur Rajesh Pathade .Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra .Respondent
ANAND
SUDHAKAR
SUDAME Mr. Kuldeep Nikam a/w. Ms. Nishi Singhvi, Advocates, for the
Digitally signed by
ANAND SUDHAKAR
Applicant
SUDAME
Date: 2026.09.01
21:13:02 +0530 Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP, for the Respondent – State
Mr. I. M. Tadwi, Police Constable B. No. 2808, Sarkarwada Police
Station, Nashik present
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : 01.09.2026
P. C.
1. Heard Mr. Nikam, learned Counsel for the Applicant and Ms.
Talhar, learned APP for the Respondent – State.
2. This Application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CRPC”) in connection with
C.R.No. 126 of 2024 registered with Sarkarwada Police Station, Nashik
for offences punishable under Sections 302, 323, 504, 143, 148 & 149
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. Mr. Nikam, learned Counsel for the Applicant arraigned as
Accused No. 2 draws my attention to the incident in question which is
narrated by the witness statement appended at page No. 157. It is
Anand 1 of 5
8. BA 3337-2026.doc
prima facie seen that the victim in question was running as errand on
behalf of his family members for purchasing certain items from the
grocery store on his motor cycle and he encountered Accused No. 3 –
Yogesh Sali who was standing on the road. At that time, Accused No. 3
along with Accused No. 1 had come to the said store to buy cigarettes.
An alteration between the parties occurred but it deescalated. This
being the precursor incident, when the aforesaid Accused persons once
again returned back to buy some more cigarettes at the said grocery
store they spotted the victim present over there. They once again
threatened and questioned him as to why he had not left the place
which led to another altercation between them. By this time, the other
three Accused persons also joined them including the Applicant. The
Applicant is arraigned as Accused No. 2. The Accused No. 1 & Accused
No. 4 have been charged with using a sharp metal object in inflicting
two blows on the stomach and thigh of the victim. In the said fight,
which erupted between the victim and Accused No. 3, prima facie,
insofar as the role of Applicant is concerned, prosecution has not been
able to show the precise role of he having taken part in the scuffle, save
and except the fact that he was undoubtedly present with the other
Accused persons. A specific role has been ascribed to Accused No. 1
and Accused No. 4 of they having used a sharp metal like object for
Anand 2 of 5
8. BA 3337-2026.doc
inflicting blows on the victim and Accused No. 5 of having held the
victim and Accused No. 3 having inflicted kick and fist blows on the
victim.
4. In view of the aforementioned prima facie case emanating from
the record and no specific role attributed to the Applicant namely
Accused No. 2 and in view of the previous Orders passed by this Court,
I am inclined to consider the Application of the Applicant for grant of
bail. The Applicant is incarcerated since 01.05.2024 for the past two
years and four months pending trial.
5. Learned APP would submit that there is one antecedent against
the Applicant. However, considering his precise role in the present
offence, I am inclined to pass this order and allow the Application.
6. Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and finding,
Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the following terms
and conditions:-
(i) Applicant – Roshan @ Mayur Rajesh Pathade is directed
to be immediately released from prison in connection
with CR. No. 126 of 2024;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing
P .R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand
only) with one surety of the like amount;
Anand 3 of 5
8. BA 3337-2026.doc
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Sarkarwada Police Station, Nashik, once every month,
on the first Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to
12:00 p.m. until commencement of trial and thereafter
shall attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court;
(iv) Applicant shall cooperate with the conduct of the trial
and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates,
unless specifically exempted. Applicant shall not seek
unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall
entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail;
(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of his current residential address and mobile telephone
number and shall forthwith inform the Investigating
Officer of any change in his residential address or
mobile telephone number, as and when such change
occurs; and
Anand 4 of 5
8. BA 3337-2026.doc
(viii)Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid
conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to
the Applicant.
7. 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.
8. Bail Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms.
(MILIND N. JADHAV, J.)
Anand 5 of 5
Checking your session…