Krushna Hiwale vs State of Maharashtra - Bail Application
Summary
The Bombay High Court heard two criminal applications concerning bail and bail condition breaches. One application sought relaxation of bail conditions, while the other requested cancellation of bail due to alleged breaches. The court reserved its decision on these matters.
What changed
The Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, considered two criminal applications related to a conviction in Sessions Case No. 68 of 2020. Criminal Application No. 3822 of 2025 was filed by the accused Madhukar S/o Namdeo Dethe seeking relaxation of bail conditions previously imposed on January 5, 2024. Concurrently, Criminal Application No. 919 of 2026 was filed by the injured witnesses seeking cancellation of the bail granted to Madhukar, alleging breaches of the bail conditions.
The court heard arguments from both the applicant's senior counsel and the respondent-State through the Additional Public Prosecutor. The core of the dispute revolves around the adherence to and potential violation of bail terms granted during the pendency of an appeal against the conviction. The court reserved its judgment after hearing the submissions, indicating a thorough review of the case's specifics and the alleged breaches.
What to do next
- Monitor court's final decision on bail relaxation and cancellation applications.
- Review bail conditions and ensure strict compliance if currently on bail for similar offenses.
Source document (simplified)
Select the following parts of the judgment
| Issues | Petitioner's Arguments |
| Respondent's Arguments | Court's Reasoning |
| Conclusion | |
For entire doc: Unmark Mark
## Unlock Advanced Research with PRISM AI
Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions
- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc -... Upgrade to Premium [Cites 3, Cited by 0 ] ### Bombay High Court
Krushna Vishwasrao Hiwale And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 23 March, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:12058
CriAppln-3822-2025
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3822 OF 2025
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 986 OF 2023
MADHUKAR S/O NAMDEO DETHE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 919 OF 2026
IN
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3851 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 986 OF 2023
KRUSHNA VISHWASRAO HIWALE AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
.....
Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. Ramankumar G.
Dodiya, Advocate for the Applicant in Criminal Application No. 3822
of 2025.
Mr. Avinash M. Reddy, Advocate for the Applicants in Criminal
Application No. 919 of 2026.
Mr. N. S. Tekale, APP for the Respondent-State.
.....
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
Reserved on : 18.03.2026
Pronounced on : 23.03.2026
ORDER : 1. Criminal Application No. 3822 of 2025 is for relaxation of
condition imposed by this Court by order dated 05.01.2024 in
CriAppln-3822-2025
Criminal Application No. 3851 of 2023 filed in Criminal Appeal No.
986 of 2023 challenging an order of conviction in Sessions Case No.
68 of 2020 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalna for
offence under Sections 307, 341 r/w 34 of IPC.
Whereas Criminal Application No. 919 of 2026 is filed by the
injured witnesses for cancellation of bail granted to the accused
Madhukar vide the above order dated 05.01.2024 passed in Criminal
Application No. 3851 of 2023 on the ground of breach of conditions
of bail.
- Learned senior counsel Mr. Deshmukh would submit that,
aggrieved by the judgment an order of conviction in Sessions Case
No. 68 of 2020, along with the Appeal, Criminal Application No. 3851
of 2023 was pressed into service for suspension of sentence and grant
of bail during pendency of appeal. He next submitted that, after
hearing applicant as well as prosecution and on going through the
record, this court had allowed the said application by order dated
05.01.2024 imposing several conditions, including condition not to
enter the vicinity of village Ambegaon, Taluka Jafrabad without prior
permission of this Court.
CriAppln-3822-2025
- Learned senior counsel emphasized that subsequently,
applicant had applied for relaxation of condition to enable him to cast
vote during parliamentary elections and even this Court, after hearing
both sides, was pleased to pass order on 06.05.2024 allowing the said
application and permitting applicant to enter the village Ambegaon
on 13.05.2024 to cast vote. He submitted that, since then, and even
prior to it, applicant had never flouted any of the conditions and has
rather abided the conditions scrupulously. However, being politically
motivated complaint, attempts are made by complainant party to see
that said benefit of bail is got withdrawn and false non-cognizable
cases are filed. Learned senior counsel pointed out that, photograph
of the applicant is tried to be projected showing his entry in the
village, but said photograph carried the date of it being snapped and
it was apparently on 13.05.2024 i.e. on the day of casting vote when
applicant, after seeking permission of this Court by virtue of order
dated 06.05.2024, had entered the village.
- Learned senior counsel moreover pointed out that thereafter,
even there was compromise and settlement. This court was also duly
informed about said settlement and it is noted so in one of the orders
of this Court passed on 19.12.2024 in Writ Petition No. 6016 of 2021.
Thus, he submits that, almost more than two years have lapsed. That,
CriAppln-3822-2025
applicant is required to stay away from his family. He has children
and has to shoulder their responsibilities. That, there are no prospects
of hearing the appeal immediately and therefore, it is his submission
that, keeping applicant away from his abode and native would impart
injustice to him, more particularly when he has not breached or
flouted any of the conditions imposed by this Court and there being
no adverse remarks against him. For above reasons he prays for
relaxing condition imposed by this Court vide clause (V) of the
operative part of the order dated 05.01.2024 in Criminal Application
No. 3851 of 2023.
- Both, learned APP as well as original complainant have resisted
the above prayers. Learned counsel for complainant has pointed out
that, rather he has moved application for cancellation of bail as there
is breach of condition imposed by this Court and applicant is regularly
entering the village and moreover indulging in issuing threats to the
complainant and witnesses of which Non Cognizable complaints are
being filed with police. Consequently, he prays for cancellation of bail
rather than relaxing condition.
- Considering above submissions. Perused the record. It seems
that in Criminal Appeal No. 986 of 2023, which is an off-shoot of
CriAppln-3822-2025
judgment and order of conviction passed in Sessions Case No. 68 of
2020 whereby present applicant stood convicted for commission of
offence under Sections 307, 341 r/w 34 of IPC along with other
accused, admittedly is still pending hearing. Record shows that after
filing appeal, Criminal Application No. 3851 of 2023 for suspension of
sentence and grant of bail was pressed into service and by order dated
05.01.2024, after hearing prosecution as well as on going through the
record, this Court allowed the application suspending the sentence.
Record shows that, meanwhile for relaxing condition for a day i.e. on
13.05.2024 on account of Parliamentary elections and to enable
applicant to cast vote, Criminal Application No. 1850 of 2024 was
preferred and it was allowed by this Court by order dated 06.05.2024.
Since then there is no adverse remark about breach of any condition
imposed by this Court by its order dated 05.01.2024.
- Further, another application for cancellation of bail is not by
State but is by complainant. Learned counsel for complainant therein
pointed out that there is breach of condition and applicant is entering
the village and moreover issuing threats, of which NCs are filed.
Photograph of applicant in the village is also placed on record but
apparently, as pointed out by learned senior counsel, the photograph
seems to be of 13.05.2024 i.e. the day of exercising adult franchise
CriAppln-3822-2025
i.e. casting vote in Parliamentary election during the day on which
this Court had relaxed the condition.
- Therefore, taking above material into consideration and as
almost two years have lapsed since applicant-accused is kept out of
the village and there being no adverse remark from prosecution side
for flouting conditions, said condition is required to be relaxed on an
undertaking that applicant shall not indulge in any act of tampering
or issuing threats to complainant party. Hence, following order is
passed :
ORDER
I. Criminal Application No. 3822 of 2025 is allowed in terms of
prayer clause (B), subject to filing of an undertaking by the
applicant Madhukar s/o Namdeo Dethe that he shall not indulge
in any act of tampering prosecution evidence or issuing threats
to complainant party.II Criminal Application No. 919 of 2026 is dismissed.
III. Both applications are accordingly disposed off.
[ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]
vre
Related changes
Source
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get Courts & Legal alerts
Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when India Bombay High Court publishes new changes.