Bombay High Court
Suraj Ashok Dhokale vs The State Of Maharashtra on 29 September, 2025
Author: R.N. Laddha
Bench: R.N. Laddha
2025:BHC-AS:41318
Mamta Kale 44-ba-3550-2025.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Bail Application No. 3550 of 2025
Suraj Ashok Dhokale
Age : 27 years, Occ. Labour,
R/at : Sutardara, Kothrud, Pune.
At present in Pune Jail. ... Applicant
versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through Paud Police Station, Pune
Vide C.R. No. 239 of 2019 ...Respondent
----
Mr Kuldeep Nikam, for the Applicant.
Mr S V Walve, APP, for Respondent / State.
----
Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 29 September 2025
P.C.:
. Heard Mr Kuldeep Nikam, learned Counsel appearing on
behalf of the applicant, and Mr S V Walve, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State.
MAMTA
AMAR
KALE
2. By this application, the applicant seeks bail in connection
Digitally signed by
MAMTA AMAR KALE
Date: 2025.09.29
with CR No.239 of 2019, registered at Paud Police Station,
20:23:24 +0530
Pune, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 364, 201
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(ii),
3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999
Page 1 of 7
__________________________________________________
29 September 2025
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2025 21:29:27 :::
Mamta Kale 44-ba-3550-2025.docx
(MCOC Act).
3. It is the case of the prosecution that on or about 15 May
2019, the dead body of an unidentified male person was
discovered in an agricultural field belonging to one Vasant
Hulawale. The said body bore multiple injuries on the facial
and cervical regions, which, upon preliminary forensic
examination, appeared to have been inflicted by a sharp-edged
weapon, suggestive of homicidal violence.
4. Upon initiation of investigation, the deceased was
subsequently identified as one Mayur Bhagwat, a resident of
Erandwana Gavthan, Karve Road, Pune, whose sudden
disappearance had been noted by his family. The identification
was made by his wife, Smt. Jyoti Bhagwat, who confirmed the
identity of the deceased at the mortuary of Sasoon Hospital,
Pune.
5. During the course of inquiry, Smt. Jyoti Bhagwat disclosed
to the investigating authorities that the deceased had borrowed
a sum of ₹20,000/- from one Vishal Desai, who is alleged to be
engaged in unlicensed and unlawful money lending activities. It
is further alleged that in January 2019, the said Vishal Desai,
accompanied by co-accused Pappu @ Yogesh Dabhade and the
Page 2 of 7
__________________________________________________
29 September 2025
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2025 21:29:27 :::
Mamta Kale 44-ba-3550-2025.docx
present applicant, visited the residence of the deceased and
issued threats of dire consequences, including threats to life, in
the event of non-repayment of the said loan along with accrued
interest. In an attempt to defuse the situation, Smt. Jyoti
Bhagwat paid ₹5,000/- to the accused persons. On the
following day, the deceased's brothers--Rajesh and Kiran--
assured the accused that the outstanding amount would be
repaid shortly. Subsequently, on 12 May 2019 at approximately
8:45 p.m., the present applicant and co-accused Vishal Desai
arrived at the residence of the deceased in a motor vehicle and
took him away under the pretext of resolving the financial
dispute. The deceased failed to return home thereafter. On 15
May 2019, while Smt. Jyoti Bhagwat and her brothers-in-law
were enroute to the police station to lodge a missing person
report, they were directed by a police official to proceed to
Sasoon Hospital, where an unidentified body had been brought.
Upon inspection, Smt. Jyoti Bhagwat identified the body as that
of her husband, Mayur Bhagwat.
6. Based on the foregoing facts and circumstances, it is the
prosecution's allegation that the present applicant, in
conspiracy with the co-accused, abducted and subsequently
murdered the deceased as a retaliatory act for non-repayment
of the loan amount.
Page 3 of 7
__________________________________________________
29 September 2025
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2025 21:29:27 :::
Mamta Kale 44-ba-3550-2025.docx
7. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present crime and
that the prosecution case rests solely upon circumstantial
evidence, devoid of any direct or ocular testimony linking the
applicant to the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the
applicant has been incarcerated as an under trial prisoner for an
inordinately prolonged duration exceeding six years and four
months, during which period the trial has remained stagnant.
Save for the formal framing of the charge, effected nearly one
year ago, no substantive progress has been made towards the
commencement of the trial. The learned Counsel asserts that
such prolonged and unexplained delay in conducting the trial
amounts to a flagrant violation of the applicant's fundamental
right to a speedy trial. The delay in trial proceedings is neither
attributable to the applicant nor occasioned by any exceptional
or supervening circumstances. In support of his contention, the
learned Counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Siddhant @ Sidharth Balu Taktode Vs. The
State of Maharashtra and Anr.1
8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor representing the respondent/State, has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the offence
1
In Criminal Appeal No. .... of 2024 (arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 12939 of 2024) dated 18 December
2024.
Page 4 of 7
__________________________________________________
29 September 2025
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2025 21:29:27 :::
Mamta Kale 44-ba-3550-2025.docx
alleged against the applicant is of a grave and serious nature.
The learned APP contends that, considering the seriousness of
imputations, the severity of the prescribed punishment and the
larger ramifications which may ensue if the applicant is
enlarged on bail at this stage, the applicant is not entitled to the
bail. It is further contended that the appropriate course, in the
facts and circumstances of the case, would be not to extend the
benefit of bail, but instead to direct that the trial be taken up on
priority and concluded within an expeditious timeframe, so as
to balance the rights of the applicant/accused and the
prosecution.
9. In Siddhant @ Sidharth Balu Taktode Vs. The State of
Maharashtra and Anr., in paragraph Nos.10 and 11, it was
observed as follows:
"10. The material placed on record would reveal
that for a period of the last six years, out of 102
dates, the accused has not been produced before the
Court either physically or through virtual mode on
most of the dates. On the last date, we had put a
query to the learned counsel appearing for the State
as to why the charges were not framed as of date in
this case. Shri Kilor fairly states that the charges
have not been framed in the cases which are
registered prior to the registration of the present
case. We may say with anguish that this is a very
Page 5 of 7
__________________________________________________
29 September 2025
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2025 21:29:27 :::
Mamta Kale 44-ba-3550-2025.docx
sorry state of affairs. If an accused is incarcerated
for a period of approximately five years without
even framing of charges, leave aside the right of
speedy trial being affected, it would amount to
imposing sentence without trial. In our view, such a
prolonged delay is also not in the interest of the
rights of the victim.
11. We are, therefore, inclined to allow the appeal.
The order passed by the Special Court dated
02.02.2024 and the impugned order of the learned
Single Judge dated 29.07.2024 are quashed and set
aside."
10. Upon perusal of the case record, it is evident that the
applicant has remained in custody for a period exceeding six
years and four months in connection with the present offence.
The learned APP has submitted that the prosecution proposes
to examine as many as twenty witnesses during the course of
the trial. However, it is seen with concern that, to date, even
the framing of charges has not been undertaken. In view of the
foregoing circumstances, particularly, the protracted duration
of custody and the stagnation in trial proceedings, this Court is
of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on
bail, subject to the imposition of suitable conditions to secure
his presence during the trial. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) The applicant shall be released on bail in
__________________________________________________
29 September 2025
Mamta Kale 44-ba-3550-2025.docx
connection with CR No.239 of 2019, registered at
Paud Police Station, Pune, upon executing a PR Bond
of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in
the like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or attempt to influence any
witnesses in any manner.
(iii) The applicant shall attend the trial proceedings
regularly and punctually, unless exempted by the
Court for valid reasons.
(iv) The applicant shall furnish his residential
address and contact details to the investigating
officer and shall inform the Court of any change
therein.
(v) Any breach of the above conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail.
11. The application stands disposed of accordingly.
(R.N. Laddha, J.)
__________________________________________________
29 September 2025
