19. BA-3637-26.odt Amberkar IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3637 OF 2026 Sachin Dilip Sonwane .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Amit Icham a/w Mr. Chaitanya Purankar, Advocates for Applicant  Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for State ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 28, 2026 P. C. : 1. Heard Mr. Icham, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Talhar, learned APP for State. 2. This is an Application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking Bail in connection with C.R. bearing No. 384/2021 dated 28.04.2021 registered at Yavat Police Station, District Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC"). 3. Applicant is indicted as Accused No.1 in the present crime. There are two other accused persons who had aided and assisted Applicant who are women, but they have been enlarged on bail. Applicant is accused of having murdered his wife. The reason is obvious from the record which probably may have led to the incident 1 of 5 19. BA-3637-26.odt in question. There is no direct evidence of any eyewitness to the incident, because the case of the prosecution stems from the fact that when the child eyewitness, daughter of Applicant, had woken up at 4:00 AM in the morning, she had seen that Applicant and the two other accused persons were attempting to hang the victim to the ceiling fan. 4. The case of the prosecution is that at the same time the child witness has infact stated that when she woke up, she had seen the body of her mother lying on the floor in the kitchen and the Applicant sitting over the body and attempting to strangle the victim. One important factor to consider in the present case for grant of bail is the long incarceration of Applicant for more than five years and six months in prison. Charge is framed on 28.07.2023 and out of the probable 35 witnesses, prosecution has examined only five witnesses and the trial is abysmally slow in its pace. 5. The ignominy of the trial being concluded in the near foreseeable future being bleak, I am inclined to consider the case of long incarceration for grant of bail to Applicant. Though the learned prosecutor, Ms. Talhar has made a vehement and valiant effort to persuade me from passing any other alternate order other than releasing the Applicant on bail in view of the gravity and the heinousness in which Applicant has murdered his wife and which has 2 of 5 19. BA-3637-26.odt been seen by the child witness, namely his daughter. However, the prosecutor may be right insofar as the gravity of the crime is concerned, but the same does not entitle the prosecution to also simultaneously delay the trial. Right to speedy trial, being ingrained under Article 21 of the Constitution of India therefore comes to the fore and hence I am inclined to consider the Applicant’s case. Though Ms. Talhar also argued that the prosecution may be put to terms to complete the trial within a time-bound program, I am not inclined to accept the said submission of the prosecution solely on account of my experience sitting as a bail judge in this roster. Not a single trial has ever been concluded within the time that can be promised by the prosecution, and I do not blame the prosecution for the delay that occurs in the system. The prosecution undoubtedly takes all efforts to ensure that the trial takes place, but there are various other factors which lead to protraction of the trial. 6. In that view of the matter, five years and 6 months being a long period of incarceration pending trial, I am inclined to consider it for grant of bail. Applicant is therefore released on bail. 7. In view of the above the following order is passed:- (i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released on bail from prison in connection with Crime No. 384 of 2021; 3 of 5 19. BA-3637-26.odt (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five only) with one or two sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at Yavat Police Station, once every month on the first Sunday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.; (iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted and will not take any unnecessary adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the prosecution to apply for revocation of this order; (v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court; (vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of his current address and mobile contact number and / or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time, as applicable; and (viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail granted to the Applicant. 4 of 5 19. BA-3637-26.odt 8. Needless to state that the above observations will not come in the way of trial as they are prima facie in nature based on the submissions made and the material placed before this Court. 9. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 5 of 5 AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Digitally signed by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.09.28 19:36:34 +0530