Bombay High Court
Sagar Chandu Sonawane vs State Of Maharashtra on 14 November, 2025
Author: R.N.Laddha
Bench: R.N.Laddha
Digitally
2025:BHC-AS:48980 signed by
CHITRA
CHITRA SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2025.11.14
19:57:35
+0530
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Bail Application No.1171 of 2025
Sagar Chandu Sonawane
Age: 30 yrs, Indian Inhabitant,
R/at Kurhegaon, Tal-Igatpuri
Dist. Nashik. ... Applicant.
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
@ Ghoti police station
vide CR no.188/2023. ... Respondent.
---
Ms Sana Raees Khan a/w Mr Harsh Shah and Ms Neha
Balani for the applicant.
Mr PP Jadhav, APP for the respondent / State.
HC-1116 BP Ahre, Ghoti police station, Nashik.
---
Coram : R.N.Laddha, J.
Date : 14 November 2025.
P.C. :
Heard Ms Sana Khan, learned Counsel appearing on
behalf of the applicant and Mr PP Jadhav, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor representing the
respondent/State.
2. By this application, the applicant seeks bail in
connection with CR No.188 of 2023, registered with Ghoti
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
Police Station, Nashik Rural, for offences punishable under
Sections 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
3. According to the informant, Ganesh Devidas Jagtap,
on 14 May 2023, his brother-in-law, Aniket Shinde, was
assaulted and murdered by the applicant and the co-
accused. Ganesh has three sisters : Komal, who is married to
accused No.1 Sandeep Nikale; Naina married to the
deceased Aniket; and Sapna. It is alleged that accused
Sandeep had an affair with Sapna and was living with her in
Badalapur while keeping his wife Komal at their native
village, which caused family disputes. When Aniket tried to
counsel Sandeep, he was threatened. On 12 May 2023, the
family attended a wedding at Ghoti and stayed for the post-
wedding rituals. Around 1:30 a.m. on 14 May 2023, after
dinner, Aniket received a call and suddenly left on his
motorcycle. Ganesh and Ram More followed on foot. On
reaching the Ghoti-Sinnar highway, they saw a quarrel and
found the applicant and the co-accused assaulting Aniket.
Aniket became unconscious, and the accused fled in a white
Scorpio car. Aniket was taken to the hospital, however,
during treatment he succumbed to the injuries and died.
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the
applicant has strenuously urged that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case
due to the ulterior motives. It is submitted that there exists a
significant and unexplained delay of more than six hours in
the lodging of the FIR. As per the prosecution's own case,
the alleged incident is stated to have occurred at around
1:30 a.m., whereas the FIR came to be registered only at
7:49 a.m., despite the fact that the concerned police station
is situated merely few minutes away from the place of
occurrence. It is urged that such an inordinate and
unexplained delay in the registration of the FIR, coupled
with the absence of any cogent explanation for the
intervening period, cast a serious doubt on the veracity of
the prosecution's version and lends credence to the
applicant's assertion that he has been deliberately and falsely
named by the informant with an oblique motive to implicate
him in the alleged offence.
5. It is also submitted that there has been an inordinate
delay of over one month in recording the statement of the
purported eyewitness, which remains unexplained by
prosecution. According to the learned Counsel, such
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
unexplained delay casts a serious doubt on the credibility of
the said witness account. The prosecution has neither
offered any justification for the belated recording nor
demonstrated any compelling circumstances that could
warrant such deferment.
6. The learned Counsel further submit that there are
material contradictions and inconsistencies between the
contents of the FIR and the statements of the prosecution
witnesses, particularly with respect to the registration
number of vehicle allegedly used by the accused persons to
flee from the scene of the incident. Such discrepancies, it is
contended, erode the credibility of the prosecution's case. It
is also submitted that the FIR does not attribute any specific
overt act or distinct role to the applicant in the alleged
incident of assault.
7. It is submitted that the motive as alleged by the
prosecution, is specifically attributed to co-accused Sandeep
(accused No.1), and not to the present applicant.
Furthermore, the purported weapons of offence, two iron
rods and one wooden log, were allegedly recovered at the
instance of the co-accused and not from the possession or at
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
the behest of the applicant. Additionally, it is submitted that
there exists a palpable inconsistency in the number of
assailants as mentioned in the FIR and in the statement of
the prosecution witnesses.
8. The learned Counsel further submits that although the
applicant was arrested on 20 May 2023, to date charges
have not yet been framed. The prosecution proposes to
examine as many as sixteen witnesses and the trial will take
its own time. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in (i) Siddharth vs State of Uttar
Pradesh (2022)1 SCC 676. (ii) Rohit Koli vs State of
Maharashtra SLP (Cri) No.4935 of 2025, (iii) Monu
Kisanlal Kumar vs State of Maharashtra, Special Leave to
Appeal (Cri No(s) 1595 of 2025 dt 13 May 2024 and (iv)
Zahur Haider Zaidi vs CBI, Cri Appeal No.605 of 2019
arising out of SLP (Cri) No.2123 of 2018 to contend that
prolonged incarceration, coupled with the absence of
substantial progress in the trial proceedings, as well as the
conduct of co-accused persons, cannot constitute valid
grounds for denying the bail.
9. The learned Counsel further submits that the applicant
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
has no criminal antecedents, and that he is ready and willing
to comply with any conditions that may be imposed by this
Court, including the condition restraining him from
entering the territorial jurisdiction of the Ghoti Police
Station until the conclusion of the trial. The applicant also
undertakes that he shall not, at any stage, seek relaxation or
modification of any such conditions imposed upon him.
10. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor representing the respondent/State has
vehemently opposed the applicant's request for the grant of
bail, contending that the offence is of a grave and serious
nature. It is submitted that the applicant and the co-
accused, in furtherance of their common intention,
assaulted the deceased with iron rods and a wooden log,
causing injuries which resulted in his death. It is submitted
that there are ocular witnesses who have directly witnessed
the incident, and that the weapons of the offence have been
recovered from the co-accused. It is additionally urged that,
rather than grant bail, this Court may issue appropriate
directions to the learned trial Court to expedite the hearing
of the trial proceedings. The delay in the commencement of
the trial, it is argued, cannot be attributed to the
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
prosecution, as one of the co-accused Vishal Nikalje,
continues to remain absconding, thereby impeding the
progress of the trial.
11. This Court has given anxious consideration to the rival
contentions canvassed across the Bar and perused the
records. The prosecution case relies heavily on the version
of purported eyewitnesses. However, the material on record
indicates that the statement of such an eyewitness was
recorded after more than one month of the incident. The
prosecution has not explained why such an important
witness's statement was recorded belatedly. Prima facie,
inconsistencies appear between the FIR and subsequent
statements, especially relating to the registration number of
the vehicle allegedly used by the accused to flee and number
of assailants. It is not in dispute that the purported motive
for the assault arises from the strained relationship between
co-accused Sandeep and the deceased, and no such motive is
attributed to the present applicant. The alleged weapons of
assault, two iron rods and one wooden log, have been
recovered at the instance of the co-accused and not from
the present applicant. The prosecution has not
demonstrated any recovery or incriminating material
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
linking the weapons directly to the applicant. It also appears
from the record that, the incident is alleged to have
occurred at about 1:30 a.m. on 14 May 2023, whereas the
FIR came to be registered only at 7:49 a.m.
12. Furthermore, the applicant has been languishing in jail
since 20 May 2023. Charges have not yet been framed. The
prosecution proposes to examine sixteen witnesses. Having
regard to the number of witnesses and the pace of the
proceedings, the trial is not likely to conclude in the near
future. The pendency attributable to absconding co-accused
cannot indefinitely prejudice the liberty of the applicant
who has been in custody for a substantial period. The
applicant has no criminal antecedents and has expressed
willingness to comply with conditions, including staying
away from the territorial jurisdiction of Ghoti Police Station
until conclusion of the trial.
13. In view of the above, this Court finds that the
applicant has made out a case for grant of bail. The
application is accordingly allowed, subject to the following
terms and conditions :
(i) The applicant shall be released on
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
bail in CR No.188 of 2023, registered at
Ghoti Police Station, Nashik Rural, upon
executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and
furnishing one or more sureties in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the learned
trial Court.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper
with the evidence or influence witnesses
in any manner.
(iii) The applicant shall not enter the
territorial jurisdiction of Ghoti Police
Station till the conclusion of the trial, save
and except to attend the trial proceedings.
(iv) The applicant upon his release,
shall furnish his residential address with
proof and contact details to the
Investigating Officer, and shall inform the
concerned Officer of any change therein.
(v) The applicant shall attend the trial
proceedings regularly and punctually,
unless exempted by the Court for a valid
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
Chitra Sonawane 904-ba-1171-2025.doc
reason.
(vi) Any breach of the above
conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.
14. The present bail application stands disposed of
accordingly.
[R. N. Laddha, J.]
____________________________________________
14 November 2025
