1 31.ba.977.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 977 OF 2026 Purushottam Gajraj Kachlam ..vs.. State of Maharashtra - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Usaiduddin E. Quazi, Advocate for the applicant (appointed). Shri A.M. Kadukar, APP for the non-applicant/State. CORAM: M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : 18.08.2026. Heard. 2. By way of this application, the applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No.06 of 2025 registered with Kotgul Police Station District Gadchiroli for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 3. The FIR came to be lodged by the mother of the deceased on 04.09.2025 that she received a call informing her that dead body of her daughter Tamin was found in the forest area of Mouza Kameli, when she went to the forest, she found that dead body of her daughter was completely decomposed and there were injury marks indicating strangulation and therefore, she lodged the report against the applicant, who is the husband of the deceased. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the circumstantial evidence. There is no clinching material 2026:BHC-NAG:10754 2 31.ba.977.2026 against the applicant and also no cause of death is mentioned in the post mortem report. He submitted that the applicant lodged the missing report of his wife stating that there was a quarrel between them while they were proceeding towards the parental home of the deceased wife and therefore, the applicant slapped his wife due to which she ran away in the jungle. On perusal of record also there is nothing to show that the applicant has committed the murder of the deceased as extra judicial confession made before the villagers, is a weak type of evidence and is in admissible in law. He invited my attention to the statements of witnesses and submits that the same were recorded on 09.09.2025 and there is material variance in the statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, (BNSS) 2023. Considering all these aspect the applicant prayed to be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned APP vehemently opposed the application on the ground that merely absence of mention of cause of death in the PM report that by itself is not sufficient to grant bail. The incident occurred on 01.09.2025 and the dead body was found on 04.09.2025, during which the body became highly decomposed which made it very difficult to identify the deceased, however, the relatives were able to identify the deceased, who went to search for her. Further he contended that extra judicial confession is an important piece of evidence as the applicant has disclosed before villagers including the mother of the deceased that, he has committed the offence by strangulating her. So far as 3 31.ba.977.2026 the missing report lodged by the applicant is concerned, it is lodged in order to save himself. He submitted that there is also last seen theory against the applicant, as he was last seen in the company of the deceased by the witnesses on 01.09.2025, after which no one has seen the deceased alive. Under such circumstances, it is only the applicant who is responsible for the death of the deceased. Therefore, considering all these aspects, the application is prayed to be rejected. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. It appears that there was a quarrel between the applicant and the deceased as the applicant was not ready to go to his in-laws place, however deceased insisted for visit and therefore, the quarrel took place. During which, the applicant slapped the deceased therefore, she left the spot and went to jungle and applicant returned home. It is further to be noted that on 03.09.2025 the applicant lodged false missing report wherein he disclosed about the said quarrel. Even this fact shows that the deceased was with the applicant and after that she was not seen alive by anyone. However, when the mother of the deceased asked the applicant whereabouts of the deceased, at that time in front of deceased’s mother, relatives and the villagers, the applicant confessed that he has killed the deceased by strangulating her. Accordingly, as the disclosure was made in the evening and they were not able to proceed to the jungle, therefore on the next date i.e. on 04.09.2025 immediately they proceeded towards the spot where the offence was committed by the applicant 4 31.ba.977.2026 as was disclosed by him and accordingly, the dead body was found in the jungle in decomposed condition. Further there are witnesses, who saw the applicant in the company of the deceased on 01.09.2025. Although the PM report is silent on the cause of death, however the fact remains that at the behest of the applicant the dead body of the deceased was recovered by the villagers and the relatives. 7. Considering all the facts and circumstances and the nature of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Hence, the application stands rejected. 8. All Misc. application(s), pending if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. 9. Fees of the appointed Counsel be quantified as per rules. (M.M. NERLIKAR , J. ) Trupti Signed by: Trupti D. Agrawal Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 19/08/2026 18:09:40