Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

ROSHAN HARI SAVADATKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The court held that bail must be granted to the applicant subject to specified conditions.

Summary

Roshan Hari Savadatkar, an undertrial accused, applied for bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with a case involving serious offences under the IPC, the Arms Act, the Maharashtra Police Act and MCOCA. He has been in custody since 9 August 2020, amounting to more than six years, while the prosecution has not examined any of the 90 witnesses listed. The court noted that eight of the eleven co‑accused had already been released on bail and that a Supreme Court order dated 14 November 2025 in the Datta Patil case directed examination of key witnesses, which the prosecution had failed to do. Relying on the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21 and the principle of parity, the court found a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, the bail application was allowed subject to a set of conditions, including a personal bond of Rs 15,000 and reporting requirements. The order expressly limited its observations to bail and did not address the merits of the underlying criminal charges.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted to an undertrial accused charged with serious offences under the IPC, Arms Act, Maharashtra Police Act and MCOCA under BNSS Sec 483 and CrPC Sec 439.
  • Whether the applicant's prolonged incarceration without witness examination violates the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, thereby warranting bail.
  • Whether the principle of parity and the prosecution's failure to examine any of the 90 witnesses justify granting bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • speedy trial
  • undertrial detention
  • parity
  • BNSS
  • CrPC
  • MCOCA
  • IPC offences
  • right to liberty

Judgment

                                                                             6. BA 3677-2026.doc



                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                        BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3677 OF 2026

                      Roshan Hari Savadatkar                          .Applicant

                                  Vs.

                      The State of Maharashtra                        .Respondent

ANAND                 Mr. Vipul Dushing a/w. Mr. Tanmay Kate i/b. Mr. Ajinkya Gaikwad,
SUDHAKAR
SUDAME                Advocates, for the Applicant
Digitally signed by
ANAND SUDHAKAR
                      Mr. Y. M. Nakhawa, APP, for the Respondent – State
SUDAME
Date: 2026.10.01
16:24:56 +0530
                                         CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

                                         DATE    : 30.09.2026
                      P. C.

                      1.      Heard Mr. Dushing, learned Counsel for the Applicant and

                      Mr. Nakhawa, learned APP for the Respondent – State.

                      2.      This Application is filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya

                      Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”)/ under Section 439

                      of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CRPC”) in

                      connection with C.R.No. 368 of 2020 registered with Bhosari Police

                      Station, Pune for offences punishable under Sections 302, 324, 352,

                      143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 149 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

                      (for short “IPC”), under Section 4 read with 25 of the Arms Act, 1959,

                      under Section 37(1) r/w. 135 & 142 of the Maharashtra Police Act and

                      under Sections 3(1)(i)(ii) and 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control

                      Anand                           1 of 4
                                                        6. BA 3677-2026.doc

Organised Crime Act (for short “MCOCA”).

3.      The Applicant before me is indicted under the Special Act as also

under the provisions of the IPC. The only reason which impels me to

consider the case of the Applicant for grant of bail is his long

incarceration as an undertrial pending trial. He has been arrested on

09.08.2020 and has completed more than six years and one month in

prison. Charge has been framed, however, out of the 90 cited

witnesses, prosecution has not been able to examine even a single

witness until today. Out of the total 11 Accused persons, 8 Accused

persons have already been enlarged on bail. One order dated

14.11.2025 passed by the Supreme Court is in the case of Accused No.

11 – Datta Patil which prima facie gives directions for examination of

the key witnesses but even that has not been done by the prosecution.

4.      Considering the aforesaid, the ground of parity is prima facie

applicable to Applicant’s case as also the fact that long incarceration

and right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India

is an indefeasible right in such a situation which entails the Applicant

to maintain the present Bail Application. I am therefore inclined to

allow the Bail Application.

5.      Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and finding,

Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the following terms


Anand                              2 of 4
                                                         6. BA 3677-2026.doc

and conditions:-

         (i)   Applicant – Roshan Hari Savadatkar is directed to be

               immediately released from prison in connection with

               CR. No. 368 of 2020;


         (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing

               P. R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand only)

               with one or two sureties of the like amount;


         (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at

               Bhosari Police Station, Pune, 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 co-operate 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

Anand                             3 of 4
                                                           6. BA 3677-2026.doc

                 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.


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 in the above terms.



                                                  (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.)




Anand                               4 of 4


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.