Bombay High Court
APEAL/489/2026 of SHANTABAI KUNDLIK VAIRAL Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER on 8 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 923 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 489 OF 2026 Shantabai Kundlik Vairal ….Appellant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & another …..Respondents ….. Mr. P. S. Dikle, Advocate holding for Mr. A . L. Kanade,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
923 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 489 OF 2026
Shantabai Kundlik Vairal
….Appellant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & another
…..Respondents
…..
Mr. P. S. Dikle, Advocate holding for Mr. A. L. Kanade, Advocate for Appellant Mr. S. G. Joshi, APP for the State.
Mr. H. V. Salunke, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 8th OCTOBER, 2026.
PER COURT :
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This appeal is for cancellation of bail granted by the Special Judge by order dated 10.04.2026 passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 126/2026.
2. Heard learned Counsel for both sides.
3. Perusal of First Information Report as well as contents of charge-sheet do not indicate prima facie offence being made out against the contesting Respondent punishable under Section 108 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. There is no allegation against the
Respondent with regard to doing any other act except for insisting for repayment of money which he lent to the deceased. Insisting payment of money without any further act in the form of assault, abuses etc. will not constitute offence under Section 108 of BNS. Insofar as offence under Section 3(1)(r) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is concerned, for want of specific allegation it cannot be said that the deceased was abused and insulted over his caste. As far as offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is concerned, there is absolutely no material to accept involvement of the Respondent in this crime.
4. Having regard to these facts, this Court finds no infirmity in the order passed by the Special Judge granting pre-arrest bail to Respondent No. 2. Hence, appeal stands dismissed.
5. It is clarified that observations made hereinabove are prima facie in nature and the Trial Court shall not get influenced by the same. ( R. M. JOSHI, J.)
dyb