BA/1244/2026 of PAVAN S/O SUBHASH CHAKRE (IN JAIL) Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO., PS RAJAPETH DIST. AMRAVATI on 8 October 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1244 OF 2026

PAVAN S/O SUBHASH CHAKRE (IN JAIL)

VERSUS

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO., PS RAJAPETH, DIST. AMRAVATI

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of

Coram, Appearances, Court's orders

or directions and Registrar's orders

Court's or Judge's orders

Mr. Parvez M. Khan, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. N.R. Rode, APP for Non-Applicant-State.

CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.

DATED : 08th OCTOBER 2026

PER COURT :-

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned APP

for the State.

2.

By this application, the applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No.749 of 2025, registered with Police Station Rajapeth, Amravati, for the offences punishable under Sections 305(a)

and 331(4) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,

2023.

3.

The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the first information report was registered on 04.12.2025, against unknown person, alleging theft of two golden rings of six grams, worth Rs.24,000/- and cash of Rs.50,000/-.

4.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant came to be arrested in crime No.514 of 2026, wherein it is 2026:BHC-NAG:13492

alleged that the applicant confessed that he had committed several other crimes and accordingly, he was made accused in eight crimes.

He submits that it was shown by the investigating agency that the recovery of golden ornaments was made from one jeweler. He submits that the applicant is falsely implicated as there is no clinching material against the applicant in order to connect him with the alleged crime.

He submits that, on the contrary, the person, who is a jeweler, has not been made accused, however, his statement was recorded, wherein he had stated that the applicant had sold him old golden ornaments. He argues that the said statement is vague as no description of the articles sold are mentioned by the said jeweler. He submits that the crime in which the applicant was arrested, was registered on 18.06.2026, however, the applicant in the present crime was arrested in the month of July 2026. It is not clear from the investigation papers what prompted the investigation agency to arrest the applicant in the said crime. Under such circumstances, he prays to grant bail to the applicant.

5.

On the other hand, learned APP vehemently opposes the application and submits that in total nine crimes including the present crime are registered against the applicant. He submits that a memorandum panchnama was recorded, wherein the applicant has disclosed that he sold the stolen golden ornaments to one Nivrutti

Maroti Devkar and accordingly, the said golden ornaments were recovered from said person in a solid form and therefore, he submits that after perusal of the statement of Nivrutti, it is crystal clear that it is the applicant who has committed the offence of theft and therefore, he prays to reject the application.

6.

Upon consideration of the submissions of both the sides, apparently, the first information report was registered against unknown person. The said first information report was registered on 04.12.2025, whereas the applicant was arrested on 04.06.2026. From the charge-sheet, it is not clear on what basis and under what circumstances, the applicant was arrested. However, after arrest, it appears that he made a confessional statement before the investigating officer that he has committed many more crimes and accordingly, he is implicated in near about nine crimes. Apart from that, there is no material against the applicant. So far as the statement of Nivrutti is concerned, in my opinion, that does not inspire confidence and is difficult to believe the statement at this stage. Under such circumstances, merely on the basis of the confessional statement, the applicant cannot kept behind bars. Hence, the following order.