Bombay High Court

SWAPNIL PUNDLIK MADHAVIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 6 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: NEELA KEDAR GOKHALE

Holding

The High Court granted bail to the applicant on the basis of parity and the absence of framed charges.

Summary

The applicant, Swapnil Pundlik Madhavi, was arrested in connection with a murder (IPC s.302 read with s.34) allegedly committed by a group of five accused. The prosecution alleged that the victim's wife and her co-accused conspired to kill the victim, and the applicant was identified by the victim's minor daughter in an identification parade. The applicant contended that the identification was unreliable because the child was asleep and did not actually see the assailants, claiming false implication. The Additional Sessions Judge had earlier rejected his bail plea, prompting a fresh application before the High Court. Relying on the fact that another co-accused (Accused No.4) had already been released on bail and noting that charges had not yet been framed, the Court granted bail on conditions of surety, regular court appearances, and compliance with other restrictions.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offence (murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34).
Whether the identification by the minor witness is sufficient to justify continued detention.
Whether parity with a co-accused already released on bail warrants granting bail to the applicant.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302, 34

Subjects

bail
murder
IPC 302
IPC 34
identification parade
minor witness
parity
Criminal Procedure

Judgment

Prasad Rajput
    (P.A.)                                         31_BA_3784_2025.doc




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                BAIL APPLICATION NO.3784 OF 2025

Swapnil Pundlik Madhavi                                …Applicant
      Versus
State of Maharashtra                                   …Respondent


Mr. Mohd. Taha a/w Sejal Jain i/by Monika Chippa, for the
      Applicant.
Ms. Poonam P. Bhosale, APP for the Respondent - State.
ASI – G.G. Gotarne, Wada Police Station, present.


                        CORAM            DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
                        DATED:           06TH FEBRUARY 2026
PC:-


1.              By this Application, the Applicant seeks his

enlargement on bail in connection with C.R.No. 24 of 2023

dated 22nd January, 2023 registered with the Wada Police

Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 302 read

with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short

‘IPC’).



2.              The facts of the case, in brief, are that there are in

all five accused persons involved in the present offence.



                                    Page 1 of 6
                               th
                              6 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
    (P.A.)                                  31_BA_3784_2025.doc


Accused No.4 has been enlarged on bail. The co-accused is a

wife of the deceased Santosh Tokare. Out of their wedlock

they having a daughter namely Tanvi aged about 13 years.

According to the prosecution, the deceased was in extra-

marital relationship with wife of the the co-accused namely

Nitin Savra. Therefore, there were frequent quarrel between

him and his wife. Thus, both co-accused hatched a plan to kill

the deceased. On 20th January, 2023, in the night the co-

accused Nitin Savra and two other accused came to the house

of the deceased and assaulted him on his head. The victim

died. The said incident was witnessed by deceased’s minor

daughter who was sleeping with her mother in the drawing

room. When she heard noise of some people entering the

house, she woke up and asked her mother in that regard. Her

mother, in fact, the Accused No.1, shut her up and scared her

that they will kill her if she did not pretend to be asleep.

Hence, she went back to sleep. Thereafter, once the Applicant

was arrested, the police conducted an Identification Parade




                              Page 2 of 6
                         th
                        6 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
    (P.A.)                                       31_BA_3784_2025.doc


and the minor daughter was able to identify the present

Applicant.



3.              The Applicant made an application seeking bail

before the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, however, by

order dated 11th August, 2023, the said application was

rejected. Hence, the Applicant has filed the present Bail

Application for the relief as prayed.



4.              Mr. Mohd. Taha, learned counsel for the Applicant,

submits that the Applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged

offence. He further submits that the minor daughter was

asleep and even on being woken up by the noise in the house,

did not witness the identity of the persons who entered the

house, as the alleged offence took place in the bedroom of the

deceased. Nevertheless, she has given a statement and

identified the present Applicant as one of the assailants.



5.              Be that as it may, the Applicant was arrested on

23rd January, 2023, and till date charges are not framed and



                                   Page 3 of 6
                              th
                             6 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
    (P.A.)                                      31_BA_3784_2025.doc


Accused No.4 is enlarged on bail, I am inclined to enlarge the

Applicant also on bail, on grounds of parity. It is accordingly

ordered as under:-



                                  ORDER

      i)        The Applicant be enlarged on bail, on

      executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ with

      one or two local sureties in the like amount;



      ii)       The Applicant shall attend the Trial Court

      concerned on each and every date unless exempted

      by the orders of the Trial Court concerned;



      iii)      The Applicant shall also attend the Police

      Station concerned once in a month between 11:00

      a.m. to 02:00 p.m.;



      iv)       If the Applicant has not deposited his

      passport, if any, the Applicant shall deposit the same

      with the Police Station concerned;



                                  Page 4 of 6
                             th
                            6 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
    (P.A.)                                       31_BA_3784_2025.doc


      v)        The Applicant shall not leave India, without

      the permission of the Trial Court;



      vi)       The Applicant shall not tamper or attempt to

      influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or

      any person concerned with the case;



      vii)      The Applicant shall inform his latest place of

      residence and contact number immediately after

      being released and / or change of residence or

      mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Court

      seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer

      of the Police Station concerned;



      viii)     The Applicant to co-operate with the conduct

      of the trial;



      ix)       Any infraction of the aforesaid conditions

      shall entail cancellation of bail.




                                   Page 5 of 6
                              th
                             6 February 2026
Prasad Rajput
    (P.A.)                                             31_BA_3784_2025.doc


6.              Application is allowed in the above terms and is

accordingly disposed of.



7.              It is made clear that the observations made herein

are prima facie and are confined to this Application and the

learned Trial Judge to decide the case on its own merits,

uninfluenced by the observations made herein.




                                                 (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J)




                                   Page 6 of 6
                              th
                             6 February 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…