17-BA-272-2026 (CR).doc TIKAM IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 272 OF 2026 Vinod @ Vinayak Balasaheb Barve ...Applicant VERSUS State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent _________________________________________________________________ Ms. Sana Raees Khan a/w. Ms. Palak Kasliwal, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. Prashant P. Jadahv, APP for Respondent-State. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 24th MARCH, 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the State. 2. By this Application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 185 of 2021 registered with Satpur Police Station, Dist. Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'). 3. It is prosecution's case that on 26/11/2021 around 7.00 a.m. Applicant murdered the brother of the first informant on the ground of enmity. 4. It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that Applicant is behind bards more than 4 and 1/2 years. There is no progress VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Digitally signed by VAISHALI ANIL TIKAM Date: 2026.04.04 13:29:07 +0530 17-BA-272-2026 (CR).doc TIKAM in the trial. Earlier liberty was granted to the Applicant to file fresh bail application after six months, if there is no progress in the trial. Thereafter only charge is framed. The statements of the eye witnesses were recorded after six days of the incident. Applicant has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial . Learned counsel further submitted that weapon used in the crime was not recovered at the first instance , but it is recovered after 10 days of the incident. Learned counsel further submitted that as per statement of witnesses Mahesh Tupe, Sachin Gangurde and Vasant Avhad were suspecting accused. Learned counsel further submitted that the certificate of doctor is not produced on record to show the fitness of mind of the deceased as it is alleged that he gave oral dying declaration and requested to allow the application.. Learned counsel relied on Rup Bahadur Magar @ Sanki @ Rabin Vs. The State of West Bengal1 , Amol Vitthal Vahile Vs. The State of Maharashtra2 , Vipin Kumar Vs. State of U.P.3, Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of Chhattisgarh4, Paras Ram Vishnoi Vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation5 , Paras Ram Vishnoi Vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation6. 1 In Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No(s).11589 /2024 decided on 02/09.2024. 2 In Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.)No(s). 13755/2023 decided on 29/01/2024. 3 Criminal Appeal No. 726/2025 arising out of SLP (Cri.) No. 17918/2024 decided on 13/02/2025. 4 Criminal Appeal No. 738 of 2025 arising out of SLP (Cri.)No. 15971/2024 decided on 14/02/2025. 5 Criminal Appeal No. 693/2-21 arising out of SLP (Cri.)No. 3610/2020 decided on 27/07/2021. 6 In Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No(s).3618/2020 decided on 27/07/2021. Page 2 of 4 17-BA-272-2026 (CR).doc TIKAM 5. It is contention of learned APP that Applicant assaulted the deceased with sickle on ground of enmity. there are eye witnesses to the incident. The weapon used in the crime recovered at the instance of the applicant. The charge is framed. Trial is in progress. If applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application. 6. I have heard both learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. 7. In first information report, it is mentioned that when the deceased was in injured condition, he was taking the name of applicant and uttering the word 'koyta koyta' and pointing out to his injuries. The statement of witnesses shows that there was dispute between the applicant and deceased on the ground of worker's union. The statement of witness Sandesh Gangurde, who has witnessed the incident, shows that altercation was going on between the applicant and the deceased and at relevant time applicant took out sharp weapon from his car, it was rapped in paper, he assaulted on the neck of the deceased for 3 to 4 times and he ran away from the incident spot by sitting in his car. The statement of other witnesses also show that the applicant assaulted the deceased with sickle. The deceased also uttered the name of the applicant and uttered the words 'koyta koyta' and pointing out his injury caused to neck. It shows that 17-BA-272-2026 (CR).doc TIKAM there is direct evidence against the Applicant. Applicant has assaulted the deceased on public place in broad day light. There is direct evidence against the applicant. Though it is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that he is behind bars more than 4 years, but, the punishment for the offence committed by the applicant is life imprisonment and capital punishment. Trial is in progress. Charge is framed. I have gone through the case laws cited by learned counsel for the Applicant. The facts of the and cited cases and present case are different. 8. Considering these facts I am not inclined to allow the application and I pass following order: ORDER (i) Bail Application No. 272 of 2026 is rejected. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)