Bombay High Court
ROHIT @ DADU SUDHAKAR PEKHALEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Summary
The applicant, Rohit @ Dadu Sudhakar Pekhale, was charged in C.R. No.126 of 2024 for offences including murder, attempt to murder, and criminal intimidation. The alleged incident involved an altercation that escalated into a stabbing of the victim with a sharp object, with the applicant and co-accused identified as having identical roles. The applicant pleaded that he has no prior criminal record and has been in custody for over two years and five months without trial. The court considered the seriousness of the charges, the length of pre‑trial detention, the lack of antecedents, and the delay in trial proceedings. Finding that the trial was not imminent and that continued detention would be oppressive, the court granted bail under Section 439 of the CrPC. The bail was conditioned on a bond, sureties, reporting requirements, and other standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 439 CrPC despite the gravity of the offences (including murder and attempt to murder).
- Whether the length of pre‑trial detention and lack of a forthcoming trial justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439
- Indian Penal Code — s. 143, 148, 149, 302, 323, 504
Subjects
- bail
- section 439
- Indian Penal Code
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal law
- Maharashtra
Judgment
17.BA.3774.2026.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.3774 OF 2026
Rohit @ Dadu Sudhakar Pekhale .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Ashok Mundargi, Senior Advocate a/w. Ms. Nishi Singhvi,
Advocates i/by Mr. Kuldeep Nikam for Applicant.
Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : OCTOBER 07, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Mundargi, learned Senior Advocate for Applicant
and Ms. Phad, learned APP for Respondent.
2. This is an Application under Section 439 of of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.126
of 2024 registered with Sarkarwada Police Station for offences
punishable under Sections 302, 323, 504, 143, 148 and 149 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. Mr. Mundargi appears for Accused No.1 in the present
matter. The role attributed to Accused Nos.1 and 4 is identical i.e.
they having stabbed the victim on his abdomen and thigh with a sharp
object. There is no recovery made by the prosecution of the alleged
weapon.
1 of 4
17.BA.3774.2026.doc
4. It is prima facie seen that the victim in question was running
an errand on behalf of his family members for purchasing certain items
from the grocery store on his motorcycle and he encountered Accused
No.3 who was standing on the road. At that time Accused No.3 along
with the present Applicant came to the said store to buy cigarettes and
an altercation occurred between them which escalated.
5. However the said altercation subsided there and then itself
and the victim left the incident spot. However, this incident was a
precursor incident and the victim once again returned back to the same
spot where the Applicant alongwith the other co-accused persons were
still buying their cigarettes. There was an altercation which occurred
thereafter which led to a fight wherein the victim was assaulted.
6. Mr. Mundargi has argued that the Applicant has no
antecedents and the role attributed to Accused Nos.1 and 4 is identical
of they having used some sharp edged weapon. Though he has argued
on other issues also relating to seizure and recovery, I need not detail
myself in the same, since the Applicant has been incarcerated for more
than 2 years 5 months in custody pending trial.
7. In that view of the matter and the ignominy of the trial not
being commencing or for that matter concluding in the near
foreseeable future being imminent, I am inclined to accept the case of
Applicant on bail.
2 of 4
17.BA.3774.2026.doc
8. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant is released on bail
subject to following conditions:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with Crime 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 or two surety / sureties 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
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 any of the witnesses or
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
3 of 4
17.BA.3774.2026.doc
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.
9. 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.
10. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by HARSHADA
HARSHADA HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date:
2026.10.07
18:58:24 +0530
4 of 4
Checking your session…