Bombay High Court

SOHEL HAKIK KHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 16 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

Bail was granted to the applicant as no specific role was attributed to him and the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to justify his detention.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with a murder case (Section 103(1) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023). The prosecution’s case was entirely circumstantial, relying mainly on a confessional statement of another accused and CCTV footage linking the accused. The applicant, accused No.5, was alleged to have arrived at the crime scene later, but no specific role or direct evidence linked him to the murder. The court observed that the FIR and investigation did not sufficiently implicate the applicant and that no concrete allegation was made against him. Consequently, the court granted bail with standard conditions, emphasizing that the order was limited to bail and not a judgment on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused No.5 when the prosecution evidence is purely circumstantial and does not specifically implicate him.
Whether the confessional statements of other accused persons are sufficient to justify continued detention of the applicant.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)

Subjects

bail
circumstantial evidence
murder
Section 103
Section 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
criminal procedure
high court

Judgment

10.BA.3464.2026.doc

Ajay

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3464 OF 2026

Sohel Hakik Khan Applicant
.. (Orig. Accused No.5)
Versus
State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

....................
 Mr. Priyal G. Sarda, Advocate h/for Mr. Shubham Sane for
Applicant.
 Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent – State.
 PSI - Mr. Kunal Bhausaheb Ingle, Bharti Vidyapeeth Police Station
present.
......…...........

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 16, 2026.

P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. Sarda, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms.

Phad, learned APP for Respondent – State.

2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with

C.R.No.61 of 2026 registered with Bharti Vidyapeeth Police Station,

District Pune for offences punishable under Section 103(1) read with

Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Applicant has been indicted in an offence of murder of the

deceased victim. The entire evidence of the prosecution is

circumstantial and not direct at all. The victim's body was found on

1 of 5
10.BA.3464.2026.doc

10.02.2026 in an abandoned quarry in Katraj area of Pune. The only

lead to the investigation is appended on page No.134 of the

Application where it is stated that on examining certain CCTV footage

on 17.02.2026, the police came across a rickshaw on a road in Pune

and in that rickshaw Accused No.3 was riding and on intercepting him

and investigating with him about the incident in question which

occurred on the intervening night 8th and 9th February, Accused No.3

informed the investigation team that the concerned victim was a friend

of Accused Nos.1 and 2.

4. Based on this lead, the prosecution has lodged the FIR on

18.02.2026, inter alia, stating that all 6 accused persons were involved

in the commission of the crime. The FIR lodged by the police constable

prima facie states that the victim accompanied Accused Nos.1, 2 and 3

only and Accused Nos.4, 5 and 6 joined them later. The FIR as it is

registered and the investigation that has taken place prima facie does

not inspire the confidence of the Court in joining the dots with regard

to the implication of the Applicant before me.

5. Applicant who is arraigned as Accused No.5 has been

according to the FIR itself shown to have arrived at the site of the

incident subsequently alongwith Accused Nos.4 and 6. However, the

same is merely based on the confessional statement of the Accused

No.3, but that also does not take the prosecution case very far because

2 of 5
10.BA.3464.2026.doc

all that Accused No.4 has confessed is that the victim was a friend of

Accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 and nothing more than that.

6. In that view of the matter and no specific role having been

attributed to Applicant before me, Applicant is enlarged on bail.

7. Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and

findings, Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the

following terms and conditions:-

(i) Applicant – Sohel Hakik Khan is directed to be

immediately released from prison in connection with

CR. No.61 of 2026;

(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 or two sureties in the like

amount;

(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at

Bharti Vidyapeeth Police Station, 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,

3 of 5
10.BA.3464.2026.doc

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

(viii)Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid

conditions shall entail cancellation of the 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.

4 of 5
10.BA.3464.2026.doc

9. Bail Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms.

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Ajay
Digitally signed
by AJAY
AJAY TRAMBAK
TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE
UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.09.16
20:05:15 +0530

5 of 5

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…