Order 131026ba1172.26 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [BA] NO. 1172 OF 2026. Uday Bhaskarrao Wandile. -VERSUS- State of Maharashtra Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Shri R.M. Daga, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri U.R. Phasate, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant /State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : OCTOBER 13, 2026. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The applicant came to be arrested in connection with Crime No.374/2026, registered with Warora Police Station, District Chandrapur for the offences punishable under Sections 103[1], 109[1], 189[4], 190, 191[3], 192, 324[5] and 126[2] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). Charge sheet came to be filed and Sections 249[b], 49, 351[4], 238 and 61[2] of BNS came to be added. 3. The first information report came to be filed by Pankaj Wankhede alleging that he and his partners had taken Bamarda Rgd. 2026:BHC-NAG:13858 Order 131026ba1172.26 2 sand excavation contract from accused Gitesh for Rs.2.5 Crores. The said contract was valid till June, 2026, however, before expiry of said period, Gitesh terminated the contract and assured refund of Rs.98,64,621/- to the informant till 28.02.2026. The deal was accordingly confirmed. However, when the amount was demanded by the informant and his partners Gitesh avoided them, and after some period called the informant and his partners to come at the Sand Ghat for receiving the amount. Informant along with his partners accordingly went to the said location, where the accused persons arrived, they were armed with weapons like sword and sticks. The informant and Bharat was assaulted by sword by accused Saurabh. Bharat was assaulted and thereafter thrown in the river, resulting in his death. Hence, the first information report. 4. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that so far as the first information report is concerned, name of applicant does not appear. The first information report was registered by the eye witness. It is submitted that the incident occurred on 01.03.2026 in between 18.55 to 19.15 hours and applicant was arrested on 04.03.2026. It is submitted that the investigation has now been completed and charge sheet has been filed. Inviting my attention to the statements of eye witnesses recorded by the Rgd. Order 131026ba1172.26 3 investigating officer, it is submitted that the incident occurred between 18.55 to 19.15 hours. Infact the applicant was 45 kms., away from the said spot and for that purpose, he relied on statement of witness Harshal, wherein from his shop the applicant and others have purchased wooden log, and he was seen in the CCTV footage at about 7.22 p.m. My attention is also invited to the inspection panchnama of the CCTV footage, which states that applicant was present at about 7.22 p.m. at village Allipur. The spot of incident is near about 30 to 35 kms from the said village Allipur, and it is not possible that when the incident was going on, the applicant was present on the spot, therefore, this fact itself is sufficient to release the applicant on bail. 5. He further submits that statement under Section 180 of BNSS recorded by the investigating officer discloses overt act and name of the applicant, however, in Section 183 statement, his name does not appear, nor any overt act has been attributed by the alleged eye witness, and therefore, according to him since there is major discrepancies and contradictions in the statements of the witnesses. Presence of the applicant itself is doubtful. Further similarly placed persons (co-accused) have already been released on bail by the trial Court and by this Court. There are total 15 Rgd. Order 131026ba1172.26 4 accused persons, and out of them 11 accused persons are released either on anticipatory bail or regular bail. Therefore, considering the nature of material collected, the applicant deserves to be granted bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the application by submitting that so far as time is concerned, it is a matter of trial, and at the stage of bail, it cannot be considered. It is submitted that statements of eye witnesses recorded under Section 180 of BNSS, specifically bears name of applicant along with other accused persons and the role has been attributed that the applicant has assaulted the deceased with the help of wooden log on his shoulder due to which his hand got dislocated. Learned A.P.P. further submits that applicant and other accused persons i.e. Saurabh, Amol and Akshay have thrown the deceased in deep river water, due to which he died and cause of death is also shown as ‘due to drowning’. He invited my attention to the postmortem report, wherein it is shown that hand of the deceased was dislocated from shoulder. He submits that though there may be some variances in statements under Section 183 and 180 of BNSS, however, according to him, it could be regarded as omissions and the same can be tested at the time of trial. The eye Rgd. Order 131026ba1172.26 5 witnesses have specifically carved out the role of the applicant, and therefore, he does not deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Upon consideration of the submissions of the parties, apparently, it appears from record that the first information report was registered by the informant Pankaj, who is injured eye witness. He has not disclosed name of applicant. Perusal of the first information report, as well as other documents annexed with the charge sheet shows that the incident occurred in between 18.55 to 19.55 hours. Though in the first information report it is mentioned that the incident occurred in between 18.55 to 19.15 hours, however, statement of eye witnesses goes to show that the incident lasted till 19.50 hours. It is to be noted that in the statement of eye witness, name of applicant as well as, overt act has been shown on his part. However, in statement recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, his name does not appear. Apart from this, it is further to be noted that perusal of statement of Harshal, owner of the shop from where the applicant is shown to have purchased wooden logs, goes to show that it was purchased at about 19.22 hours, as they left the shop at that time. In such circumstances, it is very difficult to accept that how they have reached the spot of incident, which is 30-35 kms away from the shop within 15-20 Rgd. Order 131026ba1172.26 6 minutes. So far as the timing part is concerned, the said aspect appears to be in support of the applicant. Therefore considering the timings, as well as considering the fact that applicant’s name does not appear in the first information report. It is to be remembered that the first information report is not an encyclopedia. So also there are variance in the statements recorded under Section 180 and 183 of the BNSS, wherein in 180 statement, specific role has been attributed to the applicant, however, in Section 183 Statement, the said witness exonerates the applicant. It is also to be noted that there are no criminal antecedents against the applicant, and now investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed. In such circumstances, though the incident seems to be serious in nature, however, considering the nature of material collected during the course of investigation, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order. ORDER (i) Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of. (ii) The applicant /accused Uday Bhaskarrao Wandile be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No.374/2026, registered with Warora Police Station, District Chandrapur for the offences punishable under Sections 103[1], 109[1], Rgd. Order 131026ba1172.26 7 189[4], 190, 191[3], 192, 324[5], 126[2], 249[b], 49, 351[4], 238 and 61[2] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount. (iii) The accused shall not enter within the territorial jurisdiction where the informant is residing, till the completion of the trial. (iv) 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. (v) 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. (vi) The accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial for one single date, or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail. (vii) The above observations are prima facie in nature, and restricted for the purpose of deciding this application. The Trial Court shall not get itself influenced by said observations, during the course of trial. (viii) Misc. Applications, if any, are also disposed of. JUDGE Rgd. Signed by: R.G. Dhuriya (RGD) Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 15/10/2026 12:14:36