Bombay High Court
PRADIP ALIAS BALU VISHWAS GARJEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The Court granted bail to the applicant, finding that the evidence did not warrant continued detention.
Summary
The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench considered a bail application filed by Pradip alias Balu Vishwas Garje, who was in custody for offences under Sections 103(1), 140(1), 115(2), 352, 315(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 relating to an alleged abduction, suicide and homicide of a debtor. The prosecution relied on a loan dispute, the deceased’s statement that he was abducted, and CCTV footage showing the applicant with the deceased shortly before the body was found. The defence argued that the evidence was limited to the CCTV footage and the ‘last seen together’ theory, insufficient to sustain a charge of murder, and that at most the conduct might attract Section 108. The Court noted that the ‘last seen together’ theory is weak without corroborative incriminating facts and that the post‑mortem injuries would be evaluated at trial. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and ordered his release on condition of a bond and surety, subject to standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- The adequacy of the evidence (CCTV footage and ‘last seen together’ theory) to justify continued detention for the offences charged.
- Whether the nature of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged involvement rises to the level of murder or merely to a lesser offence such as Section 108.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 108, 115(2), 140(1), 315(2), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- abduction
- suicide
- murder
- evidentiary value
- last seen together
- post-mortem
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:24261
Dilwale 1 46-BA-775-26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
46 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 775 OF 2026
Pradip Alias Balu Vishwas Garje
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
…..
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Narwade Narayan B.
APP for Respondent-State: Mr. V. K.Kotecha
…..
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 22.06.2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. By the present application, the applicant seeks bail in connection
with Crime No.1387 of 2025 registered with Pathardi Police Station Dist.
Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 140(1),
115(2), 352, 315(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant had obtained a
loan of Rs. 16,000/- from the applicant. When the amount was
demanded by the applicant, it was not returned. On 11.12.2025, the
applicant abducted the deceased and kept him in his house. On
13.12.2025, the dead body deceased Rama was found near a well
situated in the vicinity of house of applicant at village Akola. It is alleged
that due to the harassment caused by the applicant deceased had
committed suicide. Subsequently, on the basis of the supplementary
Dilwale 2 46-BA-775-26.odt
statement recorded on 22.12.2025 and the material collected during the
course of investigation, Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
came to be invoked against the applicant.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially, when
the crime came to be registered, the informant had stated that the
deceased had informed him that he was abducted by the applicant and
thereafter committed suicide. It is submitted that the implication of the
applicant for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is solely on the basis of CCTV footage.
According to the prosecution, the applicant was seen along with the
deceased before the incident. It is submitted that except the said
circumstance, there is no material connecting the applicant with the
alleged offence. He further submits that, at the most, the allegations may
attract the offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita. There is no material to constitute the offence of murder against
the applicant.
5. It is further submitted that there is no material indicating abetment
or active participation of the applicant in the commission of the alleged
offence. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. The
applicant is behind bars since 09.01.2026 and further custody of
applicant is unwarranted. Therefore, the applicant deserves to be
released on bail.
6. Per contra, the learned APP vehemently opposed the application.
Dilwale 3 46-BA-775-26.odt
He submits that even at the time of registration of the FIR, there was a
specific narration that the deceased had informed the informant about his
abduction. During the course of investigation, CCTV footage was
collected, which shows the presence of the applicant with the deceased
immediately prior to the incident. It is further submitted that there was a
monetary dispute between the deceased and the accused persons
regarding an amount of Rs.16,000/-. As the deceased had refused to pay
the said amount, the accused persons decided to eliminate him. The
prosecution case is based upon the theory of last seen together coupled
with the CCTV footage and other surrounding circumstances. Therefore,
the learned APP prayed for rejection of the application.
7. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the
investigation papers. The FIR came to be registered on 13.12.2025 for the
offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on
the basis of the statement of the informant. The material placed on
record indicates that the involvement of the applicant for the offence
punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is
primarily based upon CCTV footage and the circumstance of the deceased
having been lastly seen in the company of the applicant.
8. It is well settled that the theory of last seen together is a weak
piece of evidence unless supported by other incriminating circumstances.
Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has already been filed. The
applicant is in custody since 09.01.2026.
Dilwale 4 46-BA-775-26.odt
9. The post-mortem report indicates eight injuries on the person of
the deceased. In fact, in case of the death, drawing evidentiary value and
effect of such material would be a matter of trial. Considering the nature
of evidence collected during investigation, the period of detention
undergone by the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a
case for grant of bail.
10. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant - Pradip Alias Balu Vishwas Garje shall be released
on bail connection with Crime No.1387 of 2025 registered with Pathardi
Police Station Dist. Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under
Sections 103(1), 140(1), 115(2), 352, 315(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.15,000/- and a
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
(iii) The release of the applicant shall be subject to the following
conditions :-
A) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any prosecution witness and
shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
B) The applicant shall attend every effective date before the Trial
Court unless specifically exempted.
C) The applicant shall not in any manner whatsoever contact the
Dilwale 5 46-BA-775-26.odt
informant till the culmination of the Trial.
11. Needless to state that breach of any of the above conditions shall
entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.
12. The observations made herein are prima facie in nature and the
learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the same while deciding
the case on its own merits.
13. Bail before the Trial Court.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
Checking your session…