Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7739 (BOM)

RAHUL VILAS JAGTAP AND ORS. v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

BA/741/2026 · 2026-09-09

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

910-BA-741-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 741 OF 2026 Rahul Vilas Jagtap And Ors. ...Applicant Versus. The State of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents ----- Mr. Onkar Bajaj a/w Shankar Katkar, Vishwajeet Bagal i/b Ismail Kadage, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. S. H. Yadav, APP for the Respondent – State. PC Somanth Narayan Gawade, Karmala Police Station, is present. ------- CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. DATE : 9th September, 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard, Mr. Onkar Bajaj, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned APP for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2. By this Application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Applicants are seeking bail in connection with C.R. No. 580 of 2026 registered with Karmala Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 105, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Mr. Onkar Bajaj, learned Advocate for the Applicants, states that there are five (5) Accused in C.R. No. 580 of 2026. Applicant No. 1 is Arjun 1 910-BA-741-2026.doc Accused No. 1, Applicant No. 2 is Accused No. 2 and Applicant No. 3 is Accused No. 4 in C.R. No. 580 of 2026. 4. In brief, the prosecution case is that Applicant No. 2 owns a Hydra machine used for excavation. Applicant No. 1 is the cousin of Applicant No. 2, whereas Applicant No. 4 is the employee of Applicant No. 2. Nagnath Rakate (“deceased”) had engaged the services of Applicant No. 2 for digging two wells. The amount in respect of the said contract was payable by the deceased to Applicant No. 2. On 22.06.2026, the deceased, the Applicants, and the other two Accused were at the site where the wells were dug. The deceased, along with the employee of Applicant No. 2, namely, Bapurao Jalinder Shinde, entered the well to take measurements of the work so as to make the payments. At this point, debris fell on the deceased, resulting in his death. The Bapurao Jalinder Shinde was fortunate to survive the said incident. 5. The Applicants were arrested on 25.06.2026. Bail Application No. 533 of 2026, filed by the Applicants was rejected by the Additional Session Judge Barshi (Trial Court), on 18.07.2026. 6. Mr. Onkar Bajaj, learned Advocate for the Applicants submits that the Deceased was well-trained in taking measurements as he was Arjun 2 910-BA-741-2026.doc involved in the said business. He submits that the deceased took due care while entering the well to take measurements so that the payments due to Applicant No. 2 could be made. He submits that the incident of 22.06.2026, was a mere accident which resulted in the death of the deceased. 7. Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned APP for the Respondents – State, submits that although the deceased died due to the fall of debris/part of the wall constructed for the well, the Applicants did not exercise proper and due care while permitting the deceased to enter the well. 8. Perused the records with the assistance of the learned Advocates. 9. Perusal of the FIR indicates that the deceased had engaged the Applicants to dig the wells. On 22.06.2026, the deceased, along with Bapurao Jalinder Shinde (employee of the Accused No. 2), entered the well to take measurements to settle the payment due to Applicant No. 2. As submitted by Mr. Onkar Bajaj, learned Advocate for the Applicants, the amounts were due and payable by the deceased to the Applicants, for which the measurements were being taken. 10. Mr. Onkar Bajaj, learned Advocate for the Applicants submitted that the deceased, being familiar with such work, had taken the due Arjun 3 910-BA-741-2026.doc precautions. Though the deceased did not survive the fall of debris, the employee of Applicant No. 2 (Bapurao Jalinder Shinde) was fortunate enough to survive. 11. Considering the circumstances and the allegations in the FIR, the incident appears, prima facie, to be an accident. Whether proper and due care was taken while entering the well would be a matter for trial. 12. The Applicants have been in jail since 25.06.2026. The investigation is ongoing and the charge sheet is yet to be filed. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the continued detention of the Applicants is not warranted. 13. This Application is therefore allowed on the following terms :- (a) The Applicants are directed to be released on Bail in connection with Crime No. 580 of 2026, registered with Karmala Police Station, upon each Applicant furnishing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer at Karmala Police Station, Solapur. Arjun 4 910-BA-741-2026.doc (b) The Applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade that person from disclosing those facts to the Court or any police officer. The Applicants shall not tamper with evidence in any manner. (c) The Applicants shall provide the Investigating Officer at Karmala Police Station, Solapur, with their residential address and proof thereof, their contact number, and must inform the Investigating Officer at Karmala Police Station, Solapur, of any changes to this information from time to time. (d) The Applicants shall report to the Investigating Officer, Karmala Police Station, Solapur, as and when required by the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation in Crime No. 580 of 2026. 14. Bail Application No. 741 of 2026 is disposed of. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Arjun 5 ARJUN KRISHNA RODGE Digitally signed by ARJUN KRISHNA RODGE Date: 2026.09.09 22:10:23 +0530