[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Bapu Sadvali Kummari vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps ... on 2 February, 2026
1 13.ba.1015.2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1015 OF 2025
Bapu Sadvali Kummari
..vs..
State of Maharashtra
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Anirudh A. Krishnan, Advocate for the applicant.
Mrs. M.H. Deshmukh, APP for the State.
CORAM: M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE : 02.02.2026.
Heard.
2. By way of this application, the applicant is
seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No.50 of
2025 registered with Sironcha Police Station, District
Gadchiroli for the offence punishable under Sections
103(1) and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. Initially, the accidental death ('AD') report was
registered on 23.03.2025 by the police on the complaint
made by the sister of deceased Ravindra. It was stated
that deceased was died due to consumption of heavy
liquor.
4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that
after the registration of accidental death report, later on
during the enquiry, it transpired that the present
applicant has committed murder of the deceased with
the help of towel by strangulating his neck. Based on
these allegations, the FIR came to be registered on
29.03.2025 i.e. after 5 days, however there is no
2 13.ba.1015.2025
explanation for the delay caused. Learned Counsel for
the applicant submits that allegedly the statement of two
eyewitnesses were recorded, wherein they have disclosed
that the present applicant has tied towel around the neck
of the deceased due to which, the deceased has died. He
further submits that the statements were recorded almost
after five days and there is no explanation to that effect.
Though the postmortem report reveals the cause of death
is due to asphyxia associated with pharyngeal and
laryngeal spasm which may be due to fracture of hyoid
bone. Considering the statements of these two witnesses,
the story put-forth by the prosecution is not reliable and
it creates doubt because for 5 days no one had disclosed
about the said incident; abruptly, these two witnesses
came forward and gave the statement. Now the
investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed
and the applicant is behind the bars since 30.03.2025, he
deserves to be enlarged on bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP vehemently
opposes the application by submitting that initially, the
sister of the deceased had lodged the report stating that
the deceased was heavily drunk and due to which he
died and accordingly AD report are registered. She
further submits that there were statement of two
eyewitnesses, which goes to show that the present
applicant has killed the deceased. There is previous
enmity between the applicant and the deceased. Learned
APP heavily relied upon the statement coupled with the
postmortem report and submits that they correlate with
each other, and therefore, the applicant is involved in the
crime.
3 13.ba.1015.2025
6. I have considered the rival submissions.
Admittedly, the cause of death of the deceased as per the
medical report is due to asphyxia associated with
pharyngeal and laryngeal spasm which may be due to
fracture of hyoid bone. During the inquiry, two
statements were recorded, however the fact remains that
the AD was registered on 23.03.2025. Despite the fact
that these two witnesses belongs to the same village,
they have not come forward to state anything for 5 days.
Therefore considering the nature of material collected by
the investigation officer and the fact that the present
applicant was arrested on 30.03.2025 and as the
investigation is complete and charge-sheet is filed, I am
inclined to grant bail on certain terms and conditions.
Hence the following order :
(a) The application is allowed.
(b) The applicant/accused Bapu Sadvali Kummari
in connection with Crime No.50 of 2025
registered with Sironcha Police Station,
District Gadchiroli be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one
to two sureties in the like amount
(c) The accused shall attend each and every date
of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial
for two consecutive dates, or fails to comply
with the aforesaid conditions, his default
would entail the State to ask for cancellation
of bail.
(d) The applicant shall not enter into the
jurisdiction of Sironcha Police Station, District
4 13.ba.1015.2025
Gadchiroli.
(e) The accused shall provide his residential
address and cell number to Police station
concerned and shall not change his place of
residence without prior intimation to the
investigating Agency.
(f) The applicant/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.
7. All Misc. Application(s), pending if any, shall
also stands disposed of accordingly.
(M.M. NERLIKAR, J.)
Trupti
Signed by: Trupti D. Agrawal
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 02/02/2026 18:26:32
