Order 210826ba966.26 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [BA] NO. 966 OF 2026. Tushar Anil Supner -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 P.M. Khan, Advocate for the Applicant. Shri A.B. Badar, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : AUGUST 21, 2026. Heard. 2. The applicant came to be arrested in connection with Crime No.127/2026 registered with Frezarpura Police Station, Amravati City for the offence punishable under Section 103[2] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). Charge sheet is filed and Sections 308[2], 61[2] and 238 of the B.N.S. were added. 3. The first information report is lodged by mother of the deceased Amar alleging that on 10.02.2026, Amar asked Rgd. 2026:BHC-NAG:11063 Order 210826ba966.26 2 the informant to send him Rs.5000/- on phonepay immediately, and when the informant asked the reason for the same, he informed her that one Aadesh Telmore and other accused persons, including the applicant are asking for money. He told her that Adesh and others are in the habit of asking for money from any one, and if refused to pay, they would kill the person. Therefore, informant sent Rs.3000/- on phonepay to Amar-deceased, but, on returning home in the evening she neither found Amar in the house, nor he could be contacted on phone. Therefore, on 13.02.2026 a missing report was filed with the police station and on 01.03.2026, police called the informant for identifying the body at Irvin Hospital, which was identifed by the informant as that of Amar, which was found in a well in a jungle. Hence, the report. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that dead body of deceased Amar was found on 01.03.2026, whereas the applicant was arrested on 09.03.2026. First information report was lodged by mother of the deceased. He submits that prior to registration of first information report, 2 missing reports – 1 by mother and 1 by brother of the Rgd. Order 210826ba966.26 3 deceased were lodged. However, in neither of the missing reports, any suspicion was raised on the applicant and other accused persons. He further submits that the deceased went missing on 10.02.2026 and the dead body was found on 01.03.2026, and cause of death in post mortem report is ‘Haemorragic shock following multiple injuries’. He therefore, submits that not a single circumstance is against the applicant, as alleged in the first information report where it is alleged that one Adesh Telmore was insisting the deceased to pay him Rs.5000/- due to which, Adesh and others, including the applicant were harassing the deceased. This allegation according to the learned Counsel surfaced for the first time, and there is no whisper about the same in the missing report registered prior to registration of the first information report. According to the learned Counsel even if the first information report is perused, there are no incriminating circumstances against the applicant, and in such circumstances, he submits that merely on the basis of suspicion, the applicant is kept behind bars. He therefore, prays for grant of regular bail. 5. On the other hand the learned A.P.P. submits that Rgd. Order 210826ba966.26 4 only one missing report was filed, however, in that no one has been suspected. It is further submitted that as the dead body was found on 01.03.2026, the first information report was registered on 02.03.2026 alleging that the accused persons have committed murder of the deceased on account of money transaction. It is submitted that the CDR reports shows that deceased and accused Sanjay Wankhede, were in contact and therefore, submits that all the accused persons have committed murder of the deceased. He therefore, prays for rejection of application. 6. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties. It is not in dispute that when the missing report was registered on 13.02.2026 by mother of the deceased, it does not show any suspicion on accused persons. Even it appears from the missing report filed by brother on 14.02.2026, that report shows no suspicion on the accused persons. Further even on 01.03.2026, when the dead body was found, applicant and other accused persons were not suspected. It is only in the first information report allegations are leveled against the applicant and other accused persons. Rgd. Order 210826ba966.26 5 Upon consideration of the material which is placed on record, the learned A.P.P. was not in a position to show any incriminating circumstance against the applicant, except for a call report between accused Sanjay Wankhede and the deceased. So far as the applicant is concerned, there are no call details between applicant and the deceased, and in such circumstances only on the basis of suspicion, the applicant cannot be kept behind bars. Considering the allegations and in absence of incriminating material against the applicant, the applicant is entitled for grant of bail. Hence, the following order. ORDER (i) Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of. (ii) The applicant /accused Tushar Anil Supner be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No.127/2026 registered with Frezarpura Police Station, Amravati City for the offences punishable under Sections 103[2], 308[2], 61[2] and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount. Rgd. Order 210826ba966.26 6 (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: 25/08/2026 11:44:30