[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Prabhakar S/O Ghularam Gedam vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps ... on 23 January, 2026
1 18 BA 17.26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.17/2026
(Prabhakar S/o Ghulalram Gedam Vs. The 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. C. R. Thakur, Advocate for applicant.
Ms. S. Haider, APP for non-applicant/State.
CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATED : 23/01/2026.
Heard.
2. By this present application, the applicant is
seeking bail in connection with Crime No.158/2025
registered with Police Station Bhadrawati, Dist.
Chandrapur for the offence punishable under Sections 103,
332(a), 189(2), 189(4), 191(3), 190 and 249 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The incident took place on 28.03.2025 in the
evening. Allegations are that the applicant along with his
relatives went to the house of the informant and therein
they have beaten Amar and accordingly, Amar succumbed
to injuries. It appears from the FIR that the blow was
given with the help of an axe by one Shailesh Atram. So
far as the role attributed to the present applicant in the FIR
is concerned, the present applicant has beaten the
2 18 BA 17.26
deceased with the help of stick.
4. Upon perusal of the supplementary statements, it
appears that Amar was beaten by one Krish @ Lucky
Maraskolhe with the help of an axe and he has given blow
on the head of deceased - Amar. It is further stated in his
statement that Prashant @ Dadu was having knife in his
hand and so far as the other persons are concerned, they
were armed with sticks. The role attributed to the present
applicant is that he has instigated other persons to beat
Amar and asked them that Amar should not be left alive.
There are other statements, wherein also the present
applicant was attributed with the role of instigation. The
learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant
is of 60 years of age. He has played limited role. He
submits that considering the role of the applicant, he be
released on bail. He relied on judgment of the Supreme
Court in case of Dharmendra Chandulal Patel Vs. State of
Gujarat, AIR 2002 SC 395, wherein the Supreme Court
has granted bail considering the role attributed to the
applicant therein as of instigation.
3 18 BA 17.26
5. On the other hand, the learned APP vehemently
opposes the application and invited my attention to the FIR
and the supplementary statement of the informant,
wherein specific role has been attributed so far as the FIR
is concerned, it was alleged that the present applicant has
given blow with the help of stick, however whereas in the
supplementary statement, the role attributed is of
instigation to other accused persons. She further submits
that the fact remains that the present applicant was
present at the time of incident and played an active role.
He being an elder, he should have tried to pacify the
quarrel between both the parties, however he himself was
instrumental and actively participating in the commission
of crime. Therefore, she invited my attention to the
postmortem report, wherein there are multiple injuries on
the vital part of the body and cause of death is fracture of
skull with force injury to the brain. Accordingly, she
submits that considering the gravity of the offence, the
present applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.
6. Upon careful perusal of the FIR and various
statements, admittedly, the present applicant was present
when the alleged incident of murder took place. Further, it
4 18 BA 17.26
appears that he has actively participated in the incident.
However, considering the role which was attributed during
the entire investigation of instigation, as observed by the
Supreme Court in Dharmendra Chandulal Patel (supra)
wherein considering the limited role, the applicant therein
was released on bail, the present applicant can also be
granted bail.
7. So far as the present applicant is concerned, it
appears from the record that though he was present at the
time of incident and instigated other accused persons,
however no overt act has been attributed to him, therefore,
considering the age and the fact that the investigation is
complete and charge-sheet is filed, I am inclined to grant
bail to the present applicant, hence following order:-
ORDER
(i) Criminal application is allowed and disposed of.
(ii) The applicant/accused Prabhakar S/o Ghularam
Gedam be released on bail in connection with Crime
No.158/2025 registered with Police Station Bhadrawati,
Dist. Chandrapur for the offence punishable under Sections
103, 332(a), 189(2), 189(4), 191(3), 190 and 249 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on his furnishing P.R. Bond of
Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount.
5 18 BA 17.26
(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 concerned Police Station and shall not
change his place of residence without prior intimation to
the concerned Investigating Officer.
(v) The applicant/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 entails the State to ask for
cancellation of bail.
(vi) The applicant/accused shall not enter within the
jurisdiction of Bhadrawati Tahsil.
( M. M. NERLIKAR, J.)
Gohane
Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 23/01/2026 14:48:43
