[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Dinesh Sinnu Pada And Others vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Sub Ps., ... on 9 April, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:5666
1 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [B.A.] NO. 317 OF 2026
Dinesh Sinnu Pada and Others
-- VERSUS --
State of Maharashtra
__________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
Mr. S.V. Sirpurkar, Advocate a/w. Mr. Uday Changle, Advocate
for the Applicants.
Mr. V.A. Thakre, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State.
CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE : APRIL 09, 2026.
Heard.
2. The present application is filed seeking
regular bail in Crime No.02/2025 for the offence
punishable under Section 103(1) and Section 61(2)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS),
registered with Police Station Pendhari, District
Gadchiroli.
3. The informant who is the son of the
deceased has alleged that on 26/01/2025 at about
10:00 a.m., his father, Motiram Sonu Pada, aged 50
years, left home on a black Hero Splendor motorcycle
bearing registration number CG-19 TS-1845 to go to
the weekly market at Godalwahi. When he did not
return home till night, enquiries were made with
2 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
villagers and relatives, but no information was
received. On 27/01/2025, at about 6:30 p.m.,
Motiram Sonu Pada was found lying injured in a
forest area about 2 km from the village and about
100 meters away from the Padaboriya-Godalwahi
road, with bleeding injuries on his head. Based on
these allegations, First Information Report came to be
registered.
4. The learned counsel for applicants
submit that merely on the basis of suspicion
applicants came to be arrested. The case is based on
circumstantial evidence. The allegations against
applicants are that they hatched conspiracy to
eliminate Motiram Pada. Accordingly, applicants hired
one, Uttam Mandal, who is resident of Mayapur, Tah.
Pakhanjur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh. He further
submits that the prosecution has failed to link present
applicants with the alleged incident of murder of
Motiram. There is no complete chain of events in
order to show the involvement of present applicants.
He further submits that the motive alleged against
applicants is of business rivalry, and therefore,
according to applicants, there is no material even to
attribute the motive. It is further submitted that, this
Court, by order dated 28/01/2026, in Criminal
Application [B.A.] No.1003/2025, has already
released accused, namely, Uttam Mandal. He has
3 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
invited my attention to the observations of this Court
in Paragraph No.6 of the said application, and
accordingly, he submits that, when there is no
complete chain of circumstance established by the
prosecution to connect applicants they cannot be said
to be involved in serious crime of murder, and
therefore, he submits that the applicants be released
on bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P.
vehemently opposes the application and submits that
applicants have given contract to kill deceased -
Motiram to Uttam Mandal, resident of Mayapur,
Chhattisgarh. For this purpose, the learned A.P.P. has
relied on the statement of one Amit Haldar, wherein
he has stated that all these applicants went to
Mayapur and they have informed that the deceased
was causing trouble to them and they will have to do
something about it. Accordingly, the applicants asked
Amit, about anyone who can teach lesson to deceased
- Motiram, and accordingly, Amit has suggested name
of Uttam Mandal, and accordingly, all these four
accused persons met Uttam Mandal and there was
discussion between them. The learned A.P.P. further
invited my attention to the statement of one child
witness, who has stated that, three persons come to
Mayapur searching for Uttam Mandal, and
accordingly, she has shown the house of Uttam
4 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
Mandal. He has further invited my attention to
various statements. In one of the statement, recorded
on 05/03/2025 of one Dipkishore Chaudhari, goes to
show that the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- was deposited
by Uttam Mandal with the Mahindra Finance
Company on 28/01/2025. The learned A.P.P. submits
that, the deceased was missing from 26/01/2025,
and accordingly, the dead body was found on
27/01/2025 at about 06:30 p.m., and therefore, the
event of Uttam Mandal depositing amount of
Rs.1,20,000/- in the account of Mahendra Finance
Company on 28/01/2025 is crucial and he has
heavily relied on the statement of one, Kusan
Rajuram Kirko, recorded on 10/02/2025, which
shows that one of the accused, namely, Dinesh, met
two persons who were on scooty with their faces
masked, and that the accused Dinesh handed over a
bundle of cash to them. The said handing over of the
amount took place on 27/01/2025, and therefore,
the learned A.P.P. submits that, there is more than
sufficient evidence against applicants. He has also
invited my attention to the C.D.R. report to
vehemently submit that accused persons and contract
killers were in touch with each other, and therefore,
according to the learned A.P.P., there is more than
sufficient evidence and bail may not be granted.
5 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
6. I have considered the rival submissions.
I have seen the observations of this Court in its order
dated 28/01/2026 passed in Criminal Application
[B.A.] No.1003/2025, in the case of Uttam s/o Bimal
Mandal, wherein accused-Uttam Mandal has been
granted bail by this Court. I have also perused the
First Information Report as well as the entire
material. Admittedly, the F.I.R. was registered on
27/01/2025 by the son of the deceased, namely,
Sukhdeo. It further appears that, initially, on
26/01/2025, the deceased went missing and on the
next date around 06:30 p.m., the dead body was
found. It further appears that, the cause of death is
"traumatic injury to head leading to intracranial
Haemorrhage on right side of parieto occipital region
of head causing sudden death." According to
prosecution, bamboo sticks have been used as
weapon to kill the deceased. After perusal of the
relevant statements, admittedly, it appears that,
though statements are recorded after 13-14 days,
however, there is no explanation for delay in
recording those. Further, it is to be noted that the
entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. The
circumstances in the nature that applicants were
present at village Mayapur in the State of
Chhattisgarh where Uttam Mandal is residing. It is to
be noted that somewhere before three and half
months, these applicants have visited that place for
6 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
two times in the month of September/October as well
as November/December. Admittedly, the death was in
the month end of January. Perusal of the statement of
Amit and Sujata, shows that applicants went to
Mayapur and they met Uttam Mandal, and
accordingly, there was meeting with Uttam Mandal,
however, what happened in that meeting is not clear
from these statements. It is further to be noted that
when these meeting had taken place whether in the
month of September/October or November/
December is not clear from the statement of Amit.
The statement of said Amit was recorded on
12/02/2025, which is much after the registration of
the F.I.R. as well as after the arrest of the applicants.
Admittedly, it appears that, there were business
transactions between Uttam Mandal as well as the
present applicants. Even while scanning the material,
this Court has observed in its order dated
28/01/2026, in Criminal Application [B.A.]
No.1003/2005, in the case of Uttam s/o Bimal
Mandal, as under:-
"6. Upon hearing the learned counsel
for the applicant and the learned A.P.P.,
admittedly, it appears that death of Motiram
Pada is a homicidal death which can be
gathered from the post-mortem report,
wherein the cause of death was shown as
"due to traumatic injury to head heading to
intracranial haemorrhage on right side of
parieto occipital region of head causing
7 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
sudden death". So far as column No.17 is
concerned, there appears to be 4 injuries on
the body of the deceased including the
lacerated wound over right parieto occipital
region of scalp of size 8x6x4 cm deep wound
bleeding. The only question is whether the
present applicant can be connected with the
murder of deceased Motiram. As was
submitted by the learned counsel appearing
for the applicant that there are old business
relations between the accused Nos.1 to 4 and
the present applicant, which would be
revealed from the CDR report itself. The only
material which is collected by the
Investigating Officer are the CDR's which goes
to show the tower location of the mobile
phone of accused Nos.1 was shown in the
Padaboria jungle, however, whether the
present applicant was carrying the said
mobile or not is not clear from the material
placed before me. Further, it is to be noted
that as there are business relations between
the accused Nos.1 to 4 and present applicant,
it is but natural that there is every possibility
that the amount was deposited by the
applicant from that business transaction,
however, there is no evidence to show that
there was a conspiracy and the contract of
killing was given by the accused Nos.1 to 4 to
the present applicant. Considering the above
nature of evidence which is placed before me,
it appears that applicant was arrested on
28/02/2025, now the investigation is
complete and the charge-sheet is filed, and
therefore, I am inclined to grant bail and to
8 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
secure the presence of the present applicant
stringent conditions are put in. "
7. Therefore, considering the above
observations and the materials placed before me, I
find that under the circumstances which are pointed
out by the learned A.P.P., it is very difficult to connect
applicants with the alleged crime. It is further to be
noted that the persons those who met with Dinesh on
27/01/2025 in order to collect the amount on scooty,
they had masked their faces, therefore, whether these
masked persons are the same persons, i.e., Uttam
Mandal and Vinod Mandal, it is not clear from any of
the material which is placed before me, and
therefore, it is very difficult to link the said episode of
handing over the amount by Dinesh. It is further to be
noted from CDR reports, the location of accused -
Vinod Mandal on 27/01/2025 was at Yogendra
Nagar, whereas statement of Kusan Rajuram Kirko
shows that accused-Dinesh has handed over amount
at village Pustola to Vinod Mandal and Uttam
Mandal. Therefore, under such circumstances, it
cannot be said that there is clinching material
available against applicants. Under such
circumstances, in my opinion, the prosecution has not
brought sufficient material to keep applicants behind
bars. Admittedly, applicants are behind bars since
02/02/2025, more than one year has lapsed, I am
9 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
inclined to grant bail by imposing stringent
conditions. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Application is
allowed;
(ii) The applicants/accused (i) Dinesh
Sinnu Pada, (ii) Kaliram Mannu Madavi, (iii)
Rama Ramji Pada, and (iv) Manu Dallu Pada, be
released on regular bail in connection with
Crime No.02/2025 for the offence punishable
under Section 103(1) and Section 61(2) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS),
registered with Police Station Pendhari, District
Gadchiroli, on their furnishing a P.R. bond of
Rs.50,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand Rupees)
each with two solvent sureties in the like
amount;
(iii) The accused shall not directly or
indirectly make any inducement, threat or
promise to any person acquainted with the facts
of the case, as also shall not tamper with the
evidence;
(iv) The accused shall provide their
residential address and cell number to Police
Station concerned and shall not change their
place of residence without prior intimation to
the Investigating Agency;
10 18-Cr.BA-317-2026
(v) The accused shall attend each and
every date of trial regularly. If they fails to
attend the trial for two consecutive dates, or
fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions,
their default would entail the State to ask for
cancellation of bail or even trial Court can suo
moto take cognizance of this and cancel the bail;
(vi) Pending Misc. Application(s), if
any, also stand disposed of.
8. The observations of this Court are prima
facie in nature. The Trial Court shall not be
influenced by the observations of this Court and the
observations are restricted to this bail application
only.
[ M.M. NERLIKAR, J ]
Piyush Mahajan
