Mumbai, Maharashtra – July 13, 2022 – A Mumbai Sessions Court has rejected the bail application of Ashok Rajaram Bharugade, accused of murdering his brother. The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge A.A. Kulkarni, denied bail citing the seriousness of the offense, the prima facie evidence against the accused, and the possibility of witness tampering.

Ashok Rajaram Bharugade (35) was arrested in connection with Crime No. 34/2022, registered at Kalachowky Police Station, under section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The prosecution alleged that Bharugade murdered his brother following a dispute over the brother scolding one Umesh @ Jitendra.

During the bail hearing, Bharugade’s advocate, Mr. Pradyumnna Waghmare, argued that the investigation was complete, and his client was the sole earning member of his family. He pointed out discrepancies in the investigation, including a statement from Jitendra Kumar denying any quarrel with the deceased and doubts about the recovery of the knife. He also argued that witness statements indicated a good relationship between Bharugade and the deceased, suggesting a lack of motive.

The prosecution, represented by Ld. APP Ms. Jyotsana Gawali, opposed the bail application, arguing that the offense was serious, and Bharugade did not have a permanent address in Mumbai, raising the possibility of him absconding if released.

Judge Kulkarni, after considering the submissions and reviewing the case records, emphasized the seriousness of the offense and the prima facie evidence against Bharugade.

“In view of submissions from both the sides and settled law while granting or refusing bail, seriousness of the case, prima facie involvement of the applicant, consequences if accused is convicted, possibility of tampering of evidence, is required to be considered,” Judge Kulkarni stated in the order.

The court noted that the deceased was Bharugade’s brother and that his death was unnatural. Eye witness statements from Sachin Chavan and Santosh Shinde indicated that Bharugade assaulted the deceased. Statements from the deceased’s wife and mother also suggested that Bharugade took the deceased from their house on the night of the incident. The post-mortem report confirmed the unnatural death.

“As per case of prosecution, there is evidence in the form of CCTV footage. Therefore, in view of above stated fact and statements of witnesses before investigating officer, prima facie involvement of applicant is established. Offence against applicant is of murder of his real brother. Punishment prescribed for offence under Section 302 of IPC is death penalty or life imprisonment. Therefore, in view of prima facie involvement of applicant, consequences of the offence are serious,” Judge Kulkarni noted.

The court also expressed concern about the possibility of witness tampering, given the close relationship between the witnesses and the deceased.

“In view of relation between informant and deceased as well as witnesses examined by the prosecution, witnesses are close relatives and in relation of business. Therefore, possibility cannot be ruled out of tampering of evidence of prosecution,” Judge Kulkarni stated.

The court concluded that this was not a fit case for granting bail and rejected Bharugade’s application.