3 ba 3243 of 2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3243 OF 2026 Tulsi Yogesh Shinde .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Ritesh B. Kesarwani a/w. Mr. Subhash Hulgalkar and Mr. Shirish Desai i/b. M/s. Hulyalakar and Associate, Advocate for Applicant.  Mr. Yogesh M. Nakhawa, APP for the Respondent – State.  PSI Ghawate Chaitanya, Kothrud Police Station, Pune, present. ................… CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : AUGUST 18, 2026 P. C. : 1. Heard Mr. Kesarwani, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Mr. Nakhawa, learned APP for the Respondent–State. 2. The Applicant before me is 24 years old, having a 16 month old child, and is in incarceration in the present crime, having been arraigned as Accused No.10. According to the prosecution case, there were about 22 to 25 persons of the Pawar and Shinde family who committed the present crime of beating up the decreased victim with fist and kick blows and a wooden log ( लाकडी दांडका). The case of the prosecution is based upon the accounts of certain eyewitnesses, which are recorded and appended to the chargesheet. The said witness statements, prima facie, do not throw any light whatsoever with regard Rajeshri Aher 1 of 6 RAJESHRI PRAKASH AHER Digitally signed by RAJESHRI PRAKASH AHER Date: 2026.08.19 20:02:31 +0530 3 ba 3243 of 2026.odt to the specific role of the Applicant in committing and or assaulting the deceased victim. The CCTV footage, which has been produced and relied upon by the prosecution and appended to the Application, prima facie, shows the Applicant having gone to the terrace where the deceased victim was being beaten by the family members of the Shinde and Pawar families at 08:57 hours, and it is shown that 30 minutes thereafter, at 09:10 hours, she had come down along with another lady and one small girl. 15 minutes thereafter, she has again been seen going to the terrace along with her child. Within 9 minutes thereafter, the police had arrived at the scene of the crime. At the scene of crime, the mother of the deceased victim had also arrived along with her family members before that on being summoned by the family members of the Shinde and Pawar families. There was friction, scuffle and argument and beating of the victim which took place, pursuant to which the deceased victim, who was in a conscious state, left the terrace premises along with his mother, in a rickshaw and proceeded to a private hospital. At the said private hospital, after preliminary examination, he was advised to be taken to be to the Sassoon General Hospital at Pune, where he was taken in an Ambulance. While he was undergoing treatment at Sassoon General Hospital, Pune, the deceased person unfortunately lost his life. The cause of the death was due to Rajeshri Aher 2 of 6 3 ba 3243 of 2026.odt internal hemorrhage caused to the internal organs of the deceased – victim. 3. The case of the prosecution is based upon the eyewitnesses accounts, which are appended from Page No. 131 onwards, and which, prima facie, do not attribute or ascribe any specific role to the present Applicant in the assault. The statement of the first informant at Page 131 also does not attribute any specific role to the Applicant, though the said statement specifically states her presence. However, the said statement categorically ascribes the role played by other family members when the mother of the deceased–victim arrived at the scene of crime. The CCTV footage panchanama, a copy of which is appended at Page No.117, is relevant in the context of the present Application argued by the learned Advocate. It has been described in detail, and in fact very meticulously, the movement of each and every persons, as also to the extent of identifying 13 out of the 22 to 24 persons who are seen to be present on the terrace where the beating incident took place. The motive and cause behind the same need not be mentioned by me here, as it is not directly relevant to the present issue since the assault is affirmed by eyewitness account. The Applicant before me is a 24 year old mother of a 16 month old daughter, who has suffered incarceration from the date of her arrest on 14th March, 2026, and has been in prison for more than five months. Rajeshri Aher 3 of 6 3 ba 3243 of 2026.odt 4. The entire Shinde and Pawar family resided in the said building, and in view of a certain issue between the deceased – victim and the daughter of Anil Shinde, the deceased – victim was called and beaten black and blue on the terrace of their building. The CCTV footage also prima facie show that the entire incident which took place on the terrace was witnessed by not only the elders who were residing in the building, but even small children who had come to the terrace after hearing the commotion over there, and, thereafter, left. The case of the prosecution qua the present Applicant before me being clearly circumstantial, and the role of the Applicant attributed to her from the various statements which are recorded, prima facie, makes out a case for grant of bail. Even otherwise, the CCTV footage categorically records that the Applicant, who had initially gone to the terrace, had returned, along with a child in her hand. In that view of the matter, the Applicant has made out a case for grant of bail, and I am inclined to release the Applicant on bail. Therefore the Application is allowed. The Applicant is, therefore, released on bail. 5. In view of the above the following order is passed:- :: O R D E R :: (i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with Crime No. 71 of 2026; Rajeshri Aher 4 of 6 3 ba 3243 of 2026.odt (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only), with one surety of the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at Kothrud Police Station, Pune, once every month on the first Sunday between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.; (iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted and will not take any unnecessary adjournments, if she does so, it will entitle the prosecution to apply for revocation of this order; (v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court; (vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of her current address and mobile contact number and / or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time, as applicable; and (viii) Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail granted to the Applicant. Rajeshri Aher 5 of 6 3 ba 3243 of 2026.odt 6. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Rajeshri Aher 6 of 6