-1- 38-BA-1505-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1505 OF 2026 1. Kokila W/o. Shalikram Dandage 2. Neha W/o. Kiran Taru 3 Komal D/o. Shalikram Dandage … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent ...... Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Vaibhav T. Amle a/w Mr. A. P. Gunge APP for Respondent - State : Mr. K. K. Naik ..... CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. DATED : 17th AUGUST 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard learned Advocate for the applicants and learned APP for the respondent – State. 2. Perused the investigation papers. 3. At the outset, learned Advocate appearing for the applicants, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the application on behalf of applicant No.1 with liberty to approach the Trial Court afresh after filing of the charge-sheet. 4. Leave granted. The application to the extent of applicant No.1 stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Any subsequent application shall be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law. 2026:BHC-AUG:37137 -2- 38-BA-1505-2026 5. Applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are adult daughters of deceased and applicant no.1. They were arrested on 14th June 2026 in connection with offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of BNS. The prosecution case is that the deceased was assaulted inside the residential house in which the applicants and other family members were present. The complaint has been registered by the cousin brother of the deceased, who have alleged that, the harassment that was caused at the hands of present applicants and other two minor daughters was reported to him earlier by deceased. After he came to know about the death of the deceased, he has lodged the complaint alleging that the present applicants and other two minor daughters have committed the murder of the deceased. 6. The material presently placed before the Court shows that the deceased had sustained several injuries and that blood- stained articles and three wooden sticks were seized from the place of occurrence. The nature of the accusation is undoubtedly serious. However, at the stage of considering bail, it is necessary to examine the material specifically attributable to each of the applicants and not merely the gravity of the offence. Admittedly, this is not a case of an eye-witness accounting independently and -3- 38-BA-1505-2026 describing the precise part played by applicant Nos.2 and 3. The accusation of assault is substantially collective in nature. No particular injury has been attributed to either of these applicants, nor is any specific weapon alleged to have been wielded by either of them. The articles relied upon by the prosecution were found at the place of occurrence and were not discovered pursuant to any statement made by applicant Nos.2 and 3. 7. The prosecution has also placed reliance upon the statements allegedly made by applicant No.1 during the course of investigation. Such a statement, insofar as it contains a confession made to a police officer, cannot be treated as a substantive piece of evidence against either its maker or the co-accused, except to the limited extent of discovery permissible in relation to a fact discovered in consequence thereof. At this stage, the said statement cannot, by itself, furnish a sufficient ground for continued detention of applicant Nos.2 and 3, who are though major, but of an aged 25 and 20 years, respectively. 8. The circumstance that the occurrence took place within the four walls of the house is relevant and may require an explanation during the trial. Nevertheless, that circumstance does not relieve the prosecution of its initial obligation to place prima -4- 38-BA-1505-2026 facie material indicating the individual involvement of the accused. The principle concerning facts within the special knowledge of the occupants cannot be invoked to fill a material deficiency in the prosecution case or to attribute an identical role to every person present in the house. The report further suggests that applicant Nos.2 and 3 have continued to be in custody since 14th June 2026. They are stated to be young women and both are married. Applicant No.2, in fact, also has a child aged three years. There are no criminal antecedents against the present applicants. The material articles have already been seized and the statements of the material witnesses have also been recorded. Though the learned APP points out that the investigation is yet to be completed and the charge-sheet is yet to be filed, still, I am of the opinion that further custodial detention of applicant Nos.2 and 3 is not necessary for any specific investigative purpose. The possibility of influencing witnesses can be addressed by imposing appropriate conditions. 9. It is needless to mention that the observations made by this Court in the present order insofar as applicant Nos.2 and 3 are confined to the consideration of the present bail application. They shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the prosecution case at the time of trial. Hence, the following order: -5- 38-BA-1505-2026 ORDER (i) The application insofar as applicant No.1 is concerned stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to apply afresh after filing of charge-sheet before the Trial Court. (ii) If any such application is filed, then the Trial Court shall consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law. (iii) The application insofar as applicant Nos.2 and 3 are concerned stands allowed. (iv) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall be released on bail in Crime No. 185 of 2026 registered with Jafrabad Police Station, Tq. Jafrabad, District Jalna, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on each furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount, subject to the following conditions : a) Until filing of charge-sheet, applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall co-operate in the investigation. Thereafter, applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall attend the Trial Court on every date fixed, unless their attendance is specifically exempted. b) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall not, directly or indirectly, contact, threaten, induce or influence the informant or any prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. -6- 38-BA-1505-2026 c) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall furnish their current residential addresses and mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer and the Trial Court within seven days of release, intimate any change forthwith, and attend the Investigating Officer upon prior written notice if further investigation is required. d) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall not leave India without prior permission of the Trial Court and, if they possess passports, shall deposit the same with the Trial Court within seven days of their release. e) The applicant Nos.2 and 3 shall not involve themselves in any offence of a similar nature while on bail. f) Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail. g) All observations in this order are prima facie and confined to the decision of this bail application. The Trial Court shall decide the case independently on the evidence led before it. (v) The Bail Application is disposed of in the above terms. (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR) JUDGE Tandale