Bombay High Court
Vaibhav Raju Nalawade vs The State Of Maharashtra on 19 January, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:2934
Bail Appln.No.2304/2025
:: 1 ::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO.2304 OF 2025
Vaibhav s/o Raju Nalawade ... APPLICANT
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT
.......
Mr. D.S. Ingole, Advocate holding for
Mr. R.D. Padaswan, Advocate for applicant
Mr. G.O. Wattamwar, A.P.P. for respondent - State
.......
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 19th JANUARY, 2026
PER COURT :
1. By this application, the applicant seeks his release on
regular bail in connection with Crime No.326/2025, registered with
Karjat Police Station, District Ahilyanagar for the offence punishable
under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that, on 25/5/2025,
deceased Hanumant Shrirang Vitkar had an altercation with the
applicant and co-accused Adarsh tiwari. At about 5.00 p.m., while
Bail Appln.No.2304/2025
:: 2 ::
the deceased was sleeping in the assembly hall of Bhairavnath
Temple, co-accused Adarsh Tiwari hit the deceased on his head
with stone, wooden bat and caused fatal injuries. It is alleged that
the applicant was also accompanying with the co-accused Adarsh
Tiwari. As such, it is alleged that, the applicant and the co-accused
Adarsh Tiwari, in furtherance of their common intention, committed
murder of deceased Hanumant Vitkar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present crime. The
investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed, in which
no specific overt act has been attributed to the present applicant.
The basis for the arrest of the applicant appears to be extra-judicial
confession made to the police officers, which is not admissible in
evidence. Therefore, prayed for allowing the application.
4. Per contra, learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the
application, contending that the offence is serious in nature and the
present applicant was also accompanying with the co-accused
Adarsh Tiwari, in furtherance of their common intention, committed
murder of deceased Hanumant Vitkar. As such, prayed to reject
the application.
Bail Appln.No.2304/2025
:: 3 ::
5. After having heard learned counsel for both the sides
and perusal of the record including chargesheet, indicates that, the
applicant allegedly had prior conflict with the brother of the
informant (deceased) on account of his illicit relationship with his
sister and is based on suspicion. The record further indicates that,
the applicant was allegedly present near the temple during the
alleged incident. However, no overt act is attributed against him.
As such, he is implicated solely on the basis of last seen theory
which is an aspect of trial. Apart from the same, there is no direct
evidence to show the complicity of the applicant in the offence.
6. Nevertheless, the investigation is complete for all
intents and purposes. Therefore, in my considered opinion,
indefinite incarceration of the applicant is not warranted. Thus, the
application warrants consideration, and accordingly, the discretion
deserves to be exercised in favour of the applicant. Hence the
order :
ORDER
(i) Bail Application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant Vaibhav Raju Nalawade be released on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Bail Appln.No.2304/2025 :: 4 ::
Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount in the above crime, on the conditions that :
(a) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
(b) The applicant shall remain present on each date, unless exempted by the trial Court.
(iii) Needless to state that, nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an expression on merits of the case.
Learned Trial Court shall proceed independently and uninfluenced by the observations made hereinabove.
(SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) fmp/-