Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8540 (BOM)

SOHEL HAKIK KHAN v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

BA/3464/2026 · 2026-09-16

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

10.BA.3464.2026.doc Ajay IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3464 OF 2026 Sohel Hakik Khan .. Applicant (Orig. Accused No.5) Versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Priyal G. Sarda, Advocate h/for Mr. Shubham Sane for Applicant.  Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent – State.  PSI - Mr. Kunal Bhausaheb Ingle, Bharti Vidyapeeth Police Station present. ......…........... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 16, 2026. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Sarda, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Phad, learned APP for Respondent – State. 2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R.No.61 of 2026 registered with Bharti Vidyapeeth Police Station, District Pune for offences punishable under Section 103(1) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Applicant has been indicted in an offence of murder of the deceased victim. The entire evidence of the prosecution is circumstantial and not direct at all. The victim's body was found on 1 of 5 10.BA.3464.2026.doc 10.02.2026 in an abandoned quarry in Katraj area of Pune. The only lead to the investigation is appended on page No.134 of the Application where it is stated that on examining certain CCTV footage on 17.02.2026, the police came across a rickshaw on a road in Pune and in that rickshaw Accused No.3 was riding and on intercepting him and investigating with him about the incident in question which occurred on the intervening night 8th and 9th February, Accused No.3 informed the investigation team that the concerned victim was a friend of Accused Nos.1 and 2. 4. Based on this lead, the prosecution has lodged the FIR on 18.02.2026, inter alia, stating that all 6 accused persons were involved in the commission of the crime. The FIR lodged by the police constable prima facie states that the victim accompanied Accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 only and Accused Nos.4, 5 and 6 joined them later. The FIR as it is registered and the investigation that has taken place prima facie does not inspire the confidence of the Court in joining the dots with regard to the implication of the Applicant before me. 5. Applicant who is arraigned as Accused No.5 has been according to the FIR itself shown to have arrived at the site of the incident subsequently alongwith Accused Nos.4 and 6. However, the same is merely based on the confessional statement of the Accused No.3, but that also does not take the prosecution case very far because 2 of 5 10.BA.3464.2026.doc all that Accused No.4 has confessed is that the victim was a friend of Accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 and nothing more than that. 6. In that view of the matter and no specific role having been attributed to Applicant before me, Applicant is enlarged on bail. 7. Hence, in view of above prima facie observations and findings, Bail Application of Applicant is allowed subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) Applicant – Sohel Hakik Khan is directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with CR. No.61 of 2026; (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 or two sureties in the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at Bharti Vidyapeeth Police Station, once every month, on the first Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. until commencement of trial and thereafter shall attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court; (iv) Applicant shall cooperate with the conduct of the trial and remain present before the Trial Court on all dates, 3 of 5 10.BA.3464.2026.doc unless specifically exempted. Applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Any such conduct shall entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail; (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 his current residential address and mobile telephone number and shall forthwith inform the Investigating Officer of any change in his residential address or mobile telephone number, as and when such change occurs; and (viii)Any breach or infraction of any of the aforesaid conditions shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to the Applicant. 8. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are limited for the purpose of granting bail only and I have not made any observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made hereinabove in this order. 4 of 5 10.BA.3464.2026.doc 9. Bail Application is allowed and disposed in the above terms. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Ajay 5 of 5 AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Digitally signed by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2026.09.16 20:05:15 +0530