RAMTEJ @ VIMLESH @ GAVYA RAMA YADAVversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                                               IA-3042-2026.odt

                                                                                  Rohit Ghuge

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                   INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3042 OF 2026
                                                   IN
                                      CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2026

                    Ramtej @ Vimlesh @ Gavya Rama Yadav                       …Applicant

       Digitally
       signed by
       ROHIT
                          Versus
ROHIT  RAMDAS
RAMDAS GHUGE
GHUGE Date:
       2026.09.30
       10:56:30
       +0530        The State of Maharashtra                                  …Respondent
                    _______________________________________________________________
                    Mr. Veerdhawal Deshmukh, Advocate for the Applicant.
                    Ms. Sangeeta D. Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State.
                    _______________________________________________________________

                                                      CORAM:        BHARATI DANGRE &
                                                                    ASHISH S CHAVAN, JJ.

                                                       DATE :       23rd SEPTEMBER 2026.

                    PC.

                    1.    The Applicant who is arraigned as Accused No. 1 in the

                    proceedings before the Trial Court has approached this Court seeking

                    suspension of sentence imposed on him vide order and judgment dated

                    14.11.2025 convicting him for offenses punishable under Section 302,

                    323 and 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”) and bail

                    pending Appeal. The Applicant was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for

                    life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of which to suffer simple

                    imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable u/s 302 of the IPC.




                                                        1
                                                          IA-3042-2026.odt

2.    Heard, Mr. Deshmukh, for the Applicant and Ms. Shinde, APP for

Respondent-State, perused the Application and Appeal.


3.    The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that, on 06.03.2021,

while PW No. 1, the Complainant - PSI, Navghar Police Station was on

patrolling duty, one journalist informed him about the body of a person

lying on the Municipal ground in front of S.N. College. PW No. 1

reached the said spot, where he saw the body of a person lying and

hence, he called an ambulance and instructed a beat marshal to shift the

body to a hospital. Upon examination of the body, the person brought

was declared dead. On informing of the incident to the police station

telephonically, PW No. 1 was informed that a person from Indira Nagar

area had brought one Vicky @ Abhishek Singh. PW No.1 made inquiries

with Vicky who disclosed that he was assaulted along with the deceased

and both of them were taken in an auto-rickshaw from which the body

was thrown. Pursuant to this, PW No.1 made inquiries from persons at

the Indira Nagar Zopadpatti about the incident. Vicky, the injured

witness named the Applicant as one of the assailants, who was taken to

the Police Station for inquiry. The Applicant disclosed the names of other

accused persons and they were brought to the police station. During the

course of the inquiry, they gave information about the commission of the

offence. Therefore, PW No. 1 lodged a complaint based on which Crime

No. 160/2021 for offences punishable u/s 302, 323, 504 r/w 34 of the




                                    2
                                                            IA-3042-2026.odt

IPC came to be registered against accused persons.


4.    During the course of investigation, various panchnamas were

drawn, the dead body was forwarded for post mortem, muddemal such

as four broken battens, soil samples, the samples of blood mixed with

soil, clothes of the deceased were seized. Mobile phones of the accused

were seized. CCTV footage was collected through expert witness PW

No.5. The Applicant was arrested on the same day as the incident i.e.

06.03.2021. Investigation was concluded, chargesheet was filed. Case

was committed to the Sessions Court. The Applicant pleaded not guilty

and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses. No

defence witnesses were examined by the Applicant. The defence of the

Applicant was that of total denial and false implication.


5.    Learned Counsel for the Applicant has relied on an order of this

Court dated 10th August 2026, granting bail to Accused No. 2 in the same

C.R., submitting that the case of the present Applicant is on a similar

footing as that of the Accused No. 2. He argued that, the eye witness PW

No. 6 has stated in evidence that he has no knowledge about the further

incident and has only seen the Applicant and the co-accused Chirag

(Accused No. 4) slapping a thief. Thus, the Applicant has no connection

with the homicidal death of the deceased. He further submitted that,

there is no recovery at the instance of the Applicant. The electronic

evidence in the nature of CCTV footage suffers from several procedural



                                     3
                                                            IA-3042-2026.odt

lacunae and is not reliable. The identification of the Applicant is

doubtful. On all these grounds he sought suspension of sentence and bail

for the Applicant.


6.    Learned APP Ms. Shinde, countered the aforesaid submissions by

submitting that the death is proved to be homicidal. She submitted that,

the CCTV footage clearly spells out the role of the Applicant in

assaulting the deceased. The CCTV footage has been played in Court and

the Applicant is clearly seen in the same. There is no challenge to the

seizure panchnama setting out the transfer of the footage from the CCTV

camera to the pen drive and thereafter to the memory card. In the light

of these submissions she prays for rejection of the Application for

suspension and bail.


7.    Appreciating rival submissions, following facts emerge with clarity.

The CCTV footage clearly establishes the role of the Applicant. The

footage which was played in Court during the evidence of PW No. 10

(Investigating Officer) is in consonance with the panchnama (Exhibit-45)

which is transcript of the video. The Applicant is clearly seen in the

CCTV footage assaulting the deceased. It also reveals from the footage

that after the assault, the deceased went along with the Applicant. PW

No. 6, an eye witness has deposed that he has seen the Applicant along

with co-accused slapping a thief. Deposition of PW No. 5, prima facie

indicates the chain of the custody of the footage from its collection to its



                                     4
                                                            IA-3042-2026.odt

production before the Trial Court. There is no challenge to the certificate

issued under Section 65 – B of the Evidence Act. Thus, prima facie the

role of the Applicant in assaulting the deceased is seen. The post-mortem

report clearly reveals that the death is homicidal in nature. Thus, in our

view, prima facie, the evidence brings out the role of the Applicant in

causing the death of the deceased.


8.    In the light of the aforesaid discussion and considering the prima

facie incriminating circumstances against the Applicant, in the backdrop

of the gravity of the offence alleged against him, we find that this is not a

fit case to grant bail to the Applicant and suspend his sentence pending

Appeal. Consequently, the Application for bail and suspension of

sentence is rejected and disposed of accordingly.




ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.                          BHARATI DANGRE, J.




                                     5