Bombay High Court
VINOD BHANUDAS KSHIRSAGARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant with specified conditions.
Summary
Vinod Bhanudas Kshirsagar applied for regular bail in a case involving murder and several other offences under the IPC and the Maharashtra Police Act. The FIR, lodged by the deceased's wife, attributes only abusive conduct to the applicant, while a witness statement says he merely held the victim's hand as co‑accused used a knife and sickle. The applicant has been in custody for about one and a half years, the trial has made little progress, and the co‑accused have already been released on bail. The prosecution argued that the applicant could abscond or intimidate witnesses, citing his motive and prior antecedent. The court, after considering the limited role ascribed to the applicant and the lack of trial progress, granted bail on condition of a cash bond, sureties, and prohibitions against contacting or influencing witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant's alleged participation warrants denial of bail despite the seriousness of the offences.
- Whether the risk of absconding or tampering with witnesses justifies refusal of bail.
- Whether the lack of trial progress and the bail of co‑accused affect the applicant's right to bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 120B, 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 324, 326, 504, 506
- Maharashtra Police Act — s. 135
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Maharashtra Police Act
- criminal procedure
- trial delay
- witness tampering
- co‑accused
Judgment
4-BA-334-2025.doc
N.S.Kamble
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 334 OF 2025
Vinod Bhanudas Kshirsagar … Applicant
Versus
Digitally signed
NILAM by NILAM
SANTOSH
State Of Maharashtra … Respondent
SANTOSH KAMBLE
KAMBLE Date: 2026.01.09
11:27:19 +0530 ________________________________________________________
Mr.Akshay Bankapur, for the Applicant.
Mr.Arfan Sait, APP for Respondent-State.
________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 8th JANUARY, 2026
P.C. :
. By this Application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in
Crime No.14 of 2024 registered with Chandwad Police Station, Nashik,
for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B, 326, 324, 323,
504, 506, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for
short) and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.
2. It is prosecution’s case that on 16th January 2024, the
Applicant and co-accused assaulted the husband of First Informant with
sickle and knife and murdered him. It is alleged that the Applicant caught
Page 1 of 4
4-BA-334-2025.doc
N.S.Kamble
hold one hand of the deceased whereas co-accused assaulted him with
knife and sickle.
3. It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the
counter complaint is filed by wife of the Applicant against the deceased
and First Informant. In the FIR, no role is attributed to the Applicant
except abusing the deceased. The main role is attributed to the co-
accused Piyush Sutar and Raj Kshirsagar. After two days of the incident,
statement of the witness Prashant Thorat is recorded. In the said
statement, the role attributed to the Applicant is that he had caught
holding one hand of the deceased. The learned counsel further
submitted that the Applicant is behind bar for around one and half year.
Though charge is framed, there is no progress in the trial. The co-accused
have been released on bail. Hence, requested to allow the Application.
4. It is contention of learned APP that the Applicant along with
co-accused assaulted the deceased with sickle and knife. The specific role
is attributed to the Applicant is that he caught hold one hand of the
deceased and other co-accused assaulted him with knife and sickle. The
incident is witnessed by eye witness. The Applicant had motive to kill the
deceased. The Applicant and prosecution witnesses stays in the same
Page 2 of 4
4-BA-334-2025.doc
N.S.Kamble
locality. If Applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten
prosecution witnesses. The Applicant has one antecedent. Charge has
been framed. There is progress in the trial. Hence, requested to reject the
Application.
5. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and
documents produced on record.
6. The FIR is lodged by wife of the deceased. No role is
attributed to the Applicant in it, except abusing the deceased and First
Informant. The statement of the witness Prashant Thorat is recorded
after two days. In statement, he has stated that, the Applicant had caught
hold one hand of the deceased whereas co-accused assaulted him with
sharp weapon. In FIR, no role of assault to the deceased attributed to the
Applicant. The Applicant is behind bar for more than one year and six
months. Though charge is framed, there is no progress in the trial.
7. Considering these facts, I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) The Applicant-Vinod Bhanudas Kshirsagar, be
released on bail in Crime No.14 of 2024 registered with
Chandwad Police Station, Nashik, on furnishing PR bond of
Page 3 of 4
4-BA-334-2025.doc
N.S.Kamble
Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like
amount.
(ii) The Applicant shall not contact the First Informant
and prosecutions witnesses.
(iii) The Applicant shall not not tamper with the
evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own
merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the
observations made in this order.
(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…