Order 070726ba738.26 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [BA] NO. 738 OF 2026. Nawaz Shah Barkat Shah -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 S.V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri A.M. Kadukar, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : JULY 07, 2026. Heard. 2. The applicant came to be arrested in connection with Crime No.113/2025 registered with Patur Police Station, District Akola for the offences punishable under Sections 103[1], 238[a] and 3[5] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act. 3. The first information report came to be lodged by Sayyed Shakir Sayyed Jakir, alleging that on 27.03.2025 Izrar Khan Mukaddar Khan along with his wife had quarreled and assaulted his father over agricultural way and threatened with dire Rgd. 2026:BHC-NAG:8563 Order 070726ba738.26 2 consequences. Against which a report was lodged with the police station. On 12.04.2025 father of the informant went to graze the animals, however, as he did not return back, the informant’s brother went out to search him and found him lying dead near one field. Accordingly he informed the informant and the first information report came to be lodged. 4. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that in the first information report the informant has taken name of Izrar Khan Mukkadar Khan, that he has committed murder of his father. However, at later point of time a new story was developed and three persons were made accused, wherein it was alleged that out of them one co-accused has named the present applicant to one witness and stated that all the three accused persons have committed murder of Sayyad Jakir. In such circumstances, this extra judicial confession, which was made by the co-accused against the present applicant, cannot be said to be admissible. Apart from this, there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him with the alleged crime of murder. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the application by submitting that during investigation it Rgd. Order 070726ba738.26 3 was revealed that it is the applicant who along with other co- accused has committed the murder. Though the informant has named one Izrar as an accused, there is sufficient evidence against the applicant, and that charge sheet is filed against three accused persons, so far as the name of present applicant is concerned, in the first information report he was kept in column of suspected persons and therefore, the learned A.P.P. submits that since there is sufficient material to show involvement of the applicant, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and gone through the material placed on record. The only circumstance against the applicant is statement of co-accused which was made to one of the witness regarding his involvement and that of the applicant with other co-accused. Apart from this, the learned A.P.P. was not able to point any other circumstance against the applicant. In such circumstances, the applicant cannot be kept behind bars on the basis of material collected by the investigating agency. It further appears from the record that earlier the applicant had filed Criminal Application No.990/2025 for grant of bail, which came to be withdrawn on 13.10.2025. It appears from the said order that when this Court showed its Rgd. Order 070726ba738.26 4 disinclination to grant the relief, the learned Counsel appearing for the applicants therein withdrew the application with liberty to file afresh before the trial Court. Accordingly, the application was disposed of with liberty as prayed by the applicants. The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the reason for withdrawal was that on 23.09.2025 an application was moved by the informant before the Sessions Court seeking further investigation against Izrar, who was made accused in the first information report, meaning thereby the informant has given clean chit to the applicant, and on that basis the aforesaid application for bail was withdrawn. Be that as it may, considering the observations of this Court, and further the nature of allegations against the present applicant, prima facie I am of the opinion that there is no clinching evidence against the applicant, therefore, I am inclined to grant him bail. Hence, the following order. ORDER (i) Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of. (ii) The applicant /accused Nawaz Shah Barkat Shah be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No.113/2025 registered with Patur Police Station, Rgd. Order 070726ba738.26 5 District Akola for the offences punishable under Section 103[1], 238[a] and 3[5] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, 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 the 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 on one 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.