Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

YUVRAJ SHIVAJI GAIKWADversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The Court declined to grant bail now but permitted the accused to file a fresh bail application after the prosecution completes examination of the nine witnesses or after four months, whichever is earlier.

Summary

The High Court of Bombay, Kolhapur Bench, considered a bail application filed by Yuvraj Shivaji Gaikwad, accused of murder and conspiracy (IPC §§302, 120(b) r/w 34) under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution had examined four witnesses and indicated that nine additional key witnesses would be examined within four months. The State argued that the pending examination justified denial of bail at this stage. The applicant agreed to wait for the four‑month period before seeking fresh bail. The Court disposed of the bail application, directing that the applicant may file a fresh bail petition after the nine witnesses are examined or after the four‑month period, whichever occurs first, and that the prosecution must proceed with the witness examinations as stated.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the accused at the present stage of the investigation and trial.
  • Whether the pending examination of nine prosecution witnesses within a stipulated four‑month period justifies postponement of bail.
  • Applicability of Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to the bail application.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Section 483
  • murder
  • conspiracy
  • witness examination
  • high court
  • pending trial

Judgment

                                                          43-BA-522-2026 (CR).docx


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                 CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 522 OF 2026

Yuvraj Shivaji Gaikwad                                … Applicant
                   Versus.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                       … Respondents


                                      -----
Mr. Shivajirao V. Rane i/b. Mr. Harshvardhan S. Rane for the Applicant.
Ms. S.N. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the Respondents-State.
Officer : PI Mr. Samir S. Mulla, Panhala Police Station, present.
                                     -------

                                  Coram :      ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

                                  Date     :   1st September 2026.

PER COURT :


1.    Heard, Mr. Shivajirao Rane, learned Advocate for the Applicant and

Ms. Deshmukh, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents-State.


2.    By this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Applicant has sought the following relief :


       “a. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant Regular Bail to the
           Applicant /Accused, in connection with Panhala Police Station,
           Kolhapur in CR No.126/2024 for the offence punishable Under
           Sections 302,120(b), r/w 34 of the I.P.C.”


osk                               1 of 4
                                                         43-BA-522-2026 (CR).docx


3.    At the outset, Ms. S. Deshmukh, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents-

State, submits that the prosecution has examined four (4) witnesses viz., PW-

1 Sagar B. Khavare-Patil, PW-2 Malubai A. Patil and PW-3 Vikram @ Vikas S.

Bhopale in Sessions Case No. 163 of 2024 pending before the Principal

District and Sessions Judge, Kolhapur. She submits that the cross-examination

of PW-4 Arjun H. Patil is pending,


4.    Ms. S. Deshmukh, learned A.P.P. for the Respondents-State on

instructions from the Investigating Officer, states that the prosecution intends

to examine nine (9) main witnesses on priority, namely, (1) Namdev S. Patil,

(2) Raju B. Patil, (3) Mahadev R. Patil, (4) Ajit S. Patil, (5) Rahul Jaysing

Patil, (6) Vishwas S. Patil, (7) Dattatray H. Adkurkar, (8) Sarika V. Patil and

(9) Bhagwan A. Patil, in Sessions Case No. 163 of 2024. She submits that the

said witnesses shall be examined within four (4) months from today. She

submits that upon the examination of the said nine (9) witnesses or upon the

expiry of four (4) months, if the prosecution is unable to examine the said

nine (9) witnesses,    the Applicant be granted liberty to file a fresh bail

Application before the Trial Court in Sessions Case No. 163 of 2024.


5.    Mr. Shivajirao Rane, learned Advocate for the Applicant, submits that

the Applicant has been incarcerated for a long time. However, in view of the

statement made by Ms. S. Deshmukh, learned A.P.P., Mr. Shivajirao Rane, on



osk                                  2 of 4
                                                              43-BA-522-2026 (CR).docx


instructions from the Applicant, submits that the Applicant agrees to wait for

four (4) months before renewing the request for bail.


6.       Considering the statements made by Ms. S. Deshmukh, learned A.P.P.

for the Respondents-State and Mr. Shivajirao Rane, learned Advocate for the

Applicant, this Bail Application is disposed of with the following directions:-


      A. The Applicant is at liberty to file a fresh bail application before the Trial

         Court in Sessions Case No. 163 of 2024, after the examination of the

         nine (9) prosecution witnesses (referred to in para 4 hereinabove),

         within the four (4)-month period commencing from 8 th September

         2026 as stated by Ms. S. Deshmukh, learned A.P.P.



      B. In the event that, for any reason, the prosecution is unable to complete

         the examination of the nine (9) prosecution witnesses (referred to in

         para 4 hereinabove) within four (4) months from 8 th September 2026,

         the Applicant is at liberty to file a fresh Bail Application before the Trial

         Court in Sessions Case No. 163 of 2024 upon expiry of the said four

         (4) months from 8th September 2026.


      C. Respondent (prosecution) to act on the statement made by Ms. S.

         Deshmukh, learned A.P.P.




osk                                   3 of 4
                                                                               43-BA-522-2026 (CR).docx


                          D. Mr. Shivajirao Rane, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that the

                              Applicant shall co-operate with the examination of the nine (9)

                              prosecution witnesses and shall not seek any adjournment on the date

                              the witnesses are summoned and ready for deposition in Sessions Case

                              No. 163 of 2024.


                          E. If a fresh Bail Application is filed by the Applicant before the Trial

                              Court after a period of four (4) months, as stated hereinabove, the

                              Application be considered by the Trial Court on its own merits and in

                              accordance with law.


                    7.        Criminal Bail Application No. 522 of 2026 is disposed of in the above

                    terms.




                                                            [ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ]

           Digitally signed
           by OMKAR
OMKAR      SHIVAHAR
SHIVAHAR   KUMBHAKARN
KUMBHAKARN Date:
           2026.09.02
           11:36:21 +0530




                    osk                                 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.