Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

GOVIND LADU KALEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The Court granted regular bail to the applicant subject to a bond and surety conditions.

Summary

The applicant, Govind Ladu Kale, was charged with offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (including murder, attempt to murder, robbery, and criminal intimidation) and the Arms Act for allegedly breaking into a relative's bungalow, assaulting occupants, and stealing jewellery worth ₹11,50,000. He has been in custody for about a year, has no prior criminal record, and the investigation has progressed slowly, with only three of the twenty‑two accused arrested. The prosecution argued that he was positively identified in a test identification parade and could abscond if released. The defence contended that the delay in trial and lack of antecedents warranted bail. The Court, noting the prolonged pre‑trial detention, the applicant’s clean record, and the incomplete investigation, granted regular bail on a bond of ₹30,000 with sureties and imposed standard conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged with serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act despite the prosecution’s claim of identification and risk of absconding.
  • Whether the delay in trial and the fact that only a few co‑accused have been arrested justify the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • pre‑trial detention
  • serious offences
  • identification parade
  • trial delay
  • surety bond
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Arms Act

Judgment

                                                                            7-BA-4699-2025 (CR).doc


                      Shubhada S Kadam


                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                  CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4699 OF 2025

                      Govind Ladu Kale                                ….Applicant
                      versus
                      The State of Maharashtra                        ….Respondent
                      _________________________________________________________________

                      Mr. Adesh Konde Deshmukh along with Mr. Sainath S. Garade, Mr. Yogesh
                      A. Sukale, Ms. Shruti P. Pokale, Ms. Isha A. Palav and Mr. Sahil T.
                      Jodhwani, Advocate for Applicant.
                      Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State.
                      PSI-Wani, Lonavala City Police Station, present.
                      _________________________________________________________________

                                                           CORAM      :   SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
                                                           DATE       :   10th APRIL, 2026.
                      P.C. :

                      1.         By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in

                      Crime No. 200 of 2025 registered with Lonavala City Police Station,

                      District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2), 311,

                      331(6), 351(3) and 127 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section

                      4 read with 25 of the Arms Act.

                      2.         It is prosecution's case that on 27th May 2025, the applicant

                      and co-accused barged     into the bungalow of the uncle of the first

SHUBHADA              informant, assaulted his uncle, aunt and the watchman, and took away
SHANKAR
KADAM
Digitally signed by
                      gold and diamond ornaments worth ₹11,50,000/- by threatening them
SHUBHADA
SHANKAR KADAM
Date: 2026.04.15
18:29:33 +0530        with a sharp weapon.


                                                        Page 1 of 3
                                                       7-BA-4699-2025 (CR).doc


Shubhada S Kadam


3.         It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the

applicant has no antecedents, he is behind bars for around one year, yet

there is no progress in the trial. Out of 22 accused, the police have

arrested 3 accused. There is no recovery at the instance of the applicant

and requested to allow the application.

4.         It is contention of learned APP that the applicant was identified

in the Test Identification Parade, he was a part of the dacoity committed

in the house of the uncle of the first informant. If the applicant is released

on bail, he may abscond and requested to reject the application.

5.         I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge- sheet and

documents produced on record. The applicant is behind bars for around

one year. The applicant has no antecedents. Out of 22 accused persons,

the police arrested 3 persons. It may take time to conclude the trial.

Considering these facts, I pass following order:

                                   ORDER

       (i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 200 of 2025

           registered with Lonavala City Police Station, District Pune, on

           executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two

           sureties in the like amount.

       (ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and

           when required.


                                 Page 2 of 3
                                                      7-BA-4699-2025 (CR).doc


Shubhada S Kadam


       (iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to

           influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person

           concerned with the case.

           The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is

accordingly disposed of.

6.         It is made clear that the above observations are made only for

the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its

own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations

made in this order.

7.         All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.



                                               (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)




                                 Page 3 of 3


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.