bombay high court

Bombay High Court: In an application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) seeking bail in a matter involving offences under Section 201, 302, 392, 397, 44 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Section 37(1)(3), 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 read with Section 4(25) 27 of Arms Act, 1959, Amit Borkar, J. found prima facie insufficiency of evidence to warrant the applicant’s further detention, who was arrested on 24-08-2021.


The instant application for bail was filed by the person accused of killing a girl whom he confessed to having a love affair. He allegedly killed her by throttling on 12-08-2021, cut her body into several parts using knife, scythe, etc. and disposed of the same on 15-08-2023 using two sacks and a bedsheet through a borrowed tempo.

Court’s reasons for granting bail

After completion of investigation, a chargesheet was filed and an application under Section 439, CrPC filed by the appellant was rejected. The Court perused chargesheet and noted that no DNA samples of deceased’s heirs were collected by the prosecution, and the body parts so recovered were completely decomposed. The Court highlighted that prima facie, there were no blood stains in the tempo or any place where the alleged crime of cutting body into different parts was committed. In addition, the admissibility of the Panchnama under Section 27 had to be adjudicated during trial for giving prosecution an opportunity to lead the evidence on exactness of time of Panchanama, arrest and its effect.

The Court expressed that the identification of totally decomposed body of the deceased needed to be decided during the trial, and the material on record was prima facie insufficient to warrant the applicant’s further detention, who was arrested on 24-08-2021. The Court found the applicant to have made a case for release on bail.

Thus, the Court allowed the instant application and directed the release of applicant accused of killing his live-in partner and disposing of her chopped body. The Court also listed certain conditions to be abided by the applicant during bail.

[Hanumant Ashok Shinde v. State of Maharashtra, 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1552, decided on 27-07-2023]

Judgment by: Justice Amit Borkar

Advocates who appeared in this case :

For Applicant: Advocate Sana Raees Khan, Advocate Aditya Parmar;

For Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor Amit A. Palkar.

Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  HERE

Code of Criminal Procedure

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE

penal code, 1860

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.