Bombay High Court
DEEPAK GULAB BHATAMBREKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the applicant pending the final disposal of the appeal, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Deepak Gulab Bhatambrekar, was convicted of murder and conspiracy (IPC Sections 302, 139 read with 120‑B) and sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine. He filed an interim bail application, arguing that the prosecution’s case was unreliable due to the absence of independent witnesses and questionable CCTV footage. The respondent highlighted the trial court’s findings supporting the conviction. Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Saudan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2023) and noting that the applicant had previously been on bail during trial without misusing liberty, the court also considered parity with co‑accused who were granted bail. The High Court allowed the bail application, imposing a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with sureties and conditions for reporting to the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to a person convicted of murder and conspiracy (IPC 302, 139, 120‑B) pending an appeal.
- Whether the alleged failure to examine independent witnesses and the disputed CCTV footage affect the reliability of the prosecution’s case enough to warrant bail.
- Whether parity with other accused who were granted bail and the applicant’s prior bail during trial justify release on bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 120-B, 139, 302
Subjects
- bail
- life imprisonment
- murder
- conspiracy
- IPC
- criminal appeal
- parity
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
306. IA 1148-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1148 OF 2026
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.336 OF 2026
Deepak Gulab Bhatambrekar …. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent
…..
Mr. Satyam Harshad Nimbalkar i/b Mr. Abhishek U. Arote for the
Applicant.
Mr. Amit A. Palkar, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.
…..
CORAM: M.S. KARNIK &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATED : 14th AUGUST 2026
P.C.
1. By the present Application, the Applicant is seeking his release
on bail. The Applicant was convicted and sentenced under the
provisions of Sections 302, 139 read with 120-B of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860. The Applicant was convicted to undergo imprisonment
of life with a fine of Rs.5000/-.
2. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submitted
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 1/4
306. IA 1148-2026.doc
that the Applicant was arrested on 12 th January 2010. He further
submitted that the impugned judgment and order was passed on 19 th
May 2016 and that the hearing of this Appeal will require some time.
The learned Counsel for the Applicant has pointed out that no
independent witnesses were examined. He submitted that failure to
examine key witness renders the prosecution’s version inherently
unreliable. He further submitted that the CCTV footage of the
incident, on which the conviction is based, does not infact support
the version of the prosecution.
4. The learned A.P.P. appearing for the Respondent has invited our
attention to the observations of the learned Trial Court while
convicting the Applicant.
5. The impugned judgment and order was passed on 19 th May
2016. The Applicant is behind bar since the date of conviction. It is
unlikely that the matter can be heard immediately itself and in view
of the taking into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the matter of Saudan Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh,
[(2023) 17 SCC 446], we are inclined to release the Applicant on
bail. The Applicant was on bail during the pendency of the trial, he
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 2/4
306. IA 1148-2026.doc
has not misused his liberty. In addition to this, the other accused
were granted bail by this Court. Hence, on the ground of parity as
well, the Applicant deserves to be released on bail. Hence, the
Application is allowed on the following conditions :-
:ORDER:
(i) The Applicant be released on bail in connection
with the offence registered under Sections
302,149 read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code,
in connection with C.R. No.9 of 2010, on
furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or
two sureties of the like amount.
(ii) The Applicant shall report to the Trial Court once
in two months on the day specified by the Trial
Court, till this Appeal is finally disposed of.
(iii) The Applicant shall give details to the Trial Court
as well as nearest Police Station where he intends
to reside, informing his current address, mobile
contact number and the place of residence and
mobile details, if any, from time to time.
(iv) If there are two consecutive defaults in appearing
before the Trial Court, the learned Judge shall
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 3/4
306. IA 1148-2026.doc
make a report to High Court and the Prosecution
is at liberty to file application for cancellation of
bail.
(v) The Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M.S. KARNIK, J.)
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 4/4
Digitally signed
RAJESH by RAJESH
VASANT
VASANT CHITTEWAN
CHITTEWAN Date: 2026.08.14
17:46:31 +0530
Checking your session…