1 2-J-APPEAL-147-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 147 OF 2026 APPELLANT : Nitesh S/o Bharat Khandare, Aged about 26 years, Occ. Labour, R/o Vishvi, Tq. Mehkar, Dist. Buldhana. V E R S U S RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station Dongaon, Buldhana Taq. Mehkar & Dist. Buldhana. 2. Vijay S/o Namdeo Khandre, Aged about - 36 years, Occ - Agriculturist, R/o Vishvi, Tq - Mehkar & Dist - Buldhana. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri D. S. Sirpurkar, Advocate for appellant. Shri G. S. Umale, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. Ms. Varsha Warade, Advocate (Appointed) for respondent No.2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. DATE : 22/09/2026. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties at the stage of admission. 2. By the present appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of 2026:BHC-NAG:12542 2 2-J-APPEAL-147-2026.doc Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), the appellant / accused takes exception to the order dated 06/02/2026 passed below Exh.13 in Atrocity Special Case No.18/2025 by the learned Special Judge, Mehkar, Dist. Buldhana, thereby declined to enlarge the appellant / accused on bail, in connection with Crime No.284/2024 registered with Dongaon Police Station, Tq. Mehkar, Dist. Buldhana for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. 3. On the face of record, it appears that Crime No.284/2024 was registered with Dongaon Police Station on the oral report lodged by the respondent No.2 / informant, wherein it was alleged that on 05/12/2024, at about 11.00 a.m., accused Nitesh Khandare, Satish Trikal and Pawan Waghmare took deceased Santosh near graveyard of village Vishvi. The accused Pawan Gulab Rathod was already present over there. On suspicion that deceased Santosh had stolen iron angles from the field of accused Pawan Rathod, due to which they have mercilessly beaten the victim. Thereafter, the present appellant / accused dropped the victim at his house on his motorcycle. Thereafter, the victim Santosh narrated the incident to his real brother / informant Vijay 3 2-J-APPEAL-147-2026.doc Khandare. After some time, victim Santosh Khandare died in his house at village Vishvi. Thereafter, informant / real brother of deceased Santosh lodged report at Police Station, Dongaon. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant canvassed that, as per the oral dying declaration made by the deceased Santosh Khandare through his brother i.e. respondent No.2 as well as other witnesses Kashinath Katare and Tryambak Khandare, it appears that the present appellant / accused and other accused Satish Babanrao Trikal, Pawan Prakash Waghmare and Pawan Gulab Rathod had assaulted him with wooden stick on account of committing theft of iron angles from the field of accused Pawan Rathod. After the assault, the present appellant / accused - Nitesh Bharat Khandare dropped the deceased at his house. Thereafter, the respondent No.2/informant provided water to him. Therefore, the role played by the present appellant / accused is at par with other accused Pawan Waghmare and Satish Trikal who are already released on bail. Therefore, considering the ground of parity, appellant / accused is also entitled for bail. 5. The learned APP for respondent No.1 as well as the appointed counsel for respondent No.2 strongly opposed the appeal. 4 2-J-APPEAL-147-2026.doc 6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 canvassed that though the role attributed to the present appellant is at par with the other co-accused who are released on bail but all the accused mercilessly assaulted the deceased, which resulted in the death of the deceased. The accused personally took the victim at the graveyard. Therefore, considering the nature of crime, appellant is not entitled for bail. 7. On perusal of FIR, it prima facie appears that the deceased Santosh Namdeo Khandare had made an oral dying declaration to the respondent No.2 / informant as well as the other witnesses Kashinath Katare and Tryambak Khandare about taking him to the graveyard and thereafter, the present appellant / accused and other accused Pawan Rathod, Satish Trikal and Pawan Waghmare assaulted the deceased with a stick on account of stealing of an iron rod from his field. 8. It is a matter of record that on the basis of the oral dying declaration made by the deceased and oral report lodged by the respondent No.2, Crime No. 284/2024 was registered against the present appellant / accused as well as other co-accused. As per the contents of FIR, the present appellant / accused Nitesh 5 2-J-APPEAL-147-2026.doc Khandare had taken the deceased on motorcycle to the grave yard, where the other accused persons were also present and after the incident was over, the present appellant / accused brought the deceased back to his house. In the FIR, the respondent No.2 attributed specific roles against the present appellant / accused as well as other co-accused Satish Trikal and Pawan Waghmare regarding the assault with wooden stick on the legs and back of the deceased. 9. The Post-Mortem Report shows that the death of deceased Santosh Khandare was caused due to head injury and no role has been attributed against the present appellant / accused regarding assault with a stick on the head of the deceased. The other accused persons Satish Trikal and Pawan Waghmare are already enlarged on bail considering their act while committing the crime. Therefore, I am of the view that considering the ground of parity, the present appellant / accused is also entitled to be released on bail with stringent conditions. Accordingly, I am inclined to grant bail to the present appellant and I proceed to pass the following order :- ORDER i] The appeal is allowed. 6 2-J-APPEAL-147-2026.doc ii] The impugned order dated 06/02/2026 passed below Exh.13 in Atrocity Special Case No.18/2025 is hereby quashed and set aside. iii] The appellant / accused - Nitesh S/o Bharat Khandare be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount. iv] The appellant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses in any manner and shall not issue any threat to the witnesses. v] The appellant shall attend the trial on each and every date, except in unavoidable circumstances, for which the appellant / accused shall seek exemption from his appearance through his counsel. vi] It is made clear that the continuous absence on three dates shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. vii] The fees of the appointed counsel for respondent No.2 be quantified and paid as per rules. [JUDGE] Choulwar Signed by: V.M. Choulwar (VMC) Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 22/09/2026 18:48:19