[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Santosh Shivshankarappa Bodkhe vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Ps ... on 30 January, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:1522
1 23-Cr.BA-1196-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [B.A.] NO. 1196 OF 2025
Santosh Shivshankarappa Bodkhe
-- 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. R.M. Daga, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. V.A. Thakre, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State.
Mr. A.A. Dhawas, Advocate for assist to prosecution.
CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE : JANUARY 30, 2026.
Heard.
2. The present application is filed seeking
regular bail in Crime No.95/2025 for the offence
punishable under Sections 105, 125, 189(2), 189(4),
190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 351(3) and 352 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS), registered
with Police Station Khallar, District Amravati.
3. On 13/05/2025, the informant, Sarika
Sanjay Zhiparkar, residing at Village Nalwada, Taluka
Daryapur, District Amravati, lodged a report stating
that a dispute regarding adjacent land is pending in
court between her family and their neighbour Vinod
Sairise. While construction of a compound wall on
their own land was in progress, accused Santosh
2 23-Cr.BA-1196-2025
Shivshankarappa Bodkhe objected to the construction
claiming right of way. On 12/05/2025 at about 10.00
p.m., the accused came to the informant's house,
abused her father-in-law and demanded that the
construction be stopped. When her father-in-law
refused stating that they were constructing on their
own land, the applicant went home and got 7-8
people along with him. They all started abusing
informant's father-in-law and threatened him of dire
consequences. Thereafter, the present applicant has
thrown a brick on the head of her father-in-law who
succumbed to injuries during treatment in the
hospital. Based on these allegation, First Information
Report came to be filed.
4. Initially, offence of murder was
registered, however, when the charge-sheet was filed,
it was converted into the offence punishable under
Section 105 of the BNS, 2023, i.e. culpable homicide
not amounting to murder.
5. I have heard the learned counsel
appearing for the applicant. It appears that there was
a dispute between the informant and the present
applicant's family on account of construction of wall,
and on the day of incident, all the family members of
the applicant came in front of the house and started
verbally abusing informant's family, the present
3 23-Cr.BA-1196-2025
applicant has thrown brick which hit on the head of
the deceased, to which he succumbed to injury.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the
applicant submits that the act was not intentional,
and therefore, the police has filed the charge-sheet
under section 105 of the BNS. He further submits
that all the accused persons except the present
applicant has been released on bail by this Court. The
offence is individual in character. It does not have any
impact on the society, and therefore, requested to
release the applicant on bail as investigation is over
and charge-sheet is filed.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the
intevenor submits that the informant has already
moved an application before the trial Court making
application against the investigating officer for filing
charge-sheet under Section 105. He further submits
that the case would not fall under Section 105, but
under Section 103, and therefore, prayed to reject the
application.
8. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P.
opposes the application and submits that there is
direct evidence against the present applicant, there is
overt act, as he has thrown brick which hit on the
head of the deceased, and accordingly, he died. He
further submits that there are eye witnesses to the
4 23-Cr.BA-1196-2025
incident. Lastly, it is submitted that the application be
rejected.
9. Upon hearing the learned counsel for
the applicant as well as the learned A.P.P., admittedly,
it appears that the present applicant has thrown
brick on the head of the father-in-law of informant
resulting into death of father-in-law. As could be
gathered that, initially, the offence under Section 103
was registered, however, later on, after investigation,
it was converted into Section 105 and the charge-
sheet under that provision was filed. Now, admittedly,
the investigation is complete and the charge sheet is
filed, and therefore, I do not see any reasons to keep
the applicant behind bars.
10. 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. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Application is
allowed;
(ii) The applicant/accused (Santosh
Shivshankarappa Bodkhe) be released on
regular bail in connection with Crime
No.95/2025 registered with Police Station
5 23-Cr.BA-1196-2025
Khallar, District Amravati, for the offence
punishable under Sections 105, 125, 189(2),
189(4), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 351(3)
and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
(BNS), on his furnishing a P.R. bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand Rupees)
with one solvent surety 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 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;
(v) 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;
(vi) Pending Misc. Application(s), if
any, also stand disposed of.
[ M.M. NERLIKAR, J ]
Piyush Mahajan
