Bombay High Court grants bail to 70-year-old accused of human sacrifice

The Bombay High Court recently granted bail to a 70-year-old man from Satara accused of murdering a young girl by slitting her throat as part of a human sacrifice to gain prosperity and hidden wealth [Phoolsingh Shevu Rathod and anr v State of Maharashtra].The accused, Mohansingh Sitaram Naik, was charged in a case that involved sinister rituals and criminal conspiracy. Single-judge Justice SG Dige observed that while the allegations were serious, Naik's advanced age and the duration of his incarceration were factors to be considered. "The applicant is more than 70 year old, he is behind bar for more than two years. Charge has been framed against the applicant, yet trial has not been commenced. It may take time to conclude the trial," the Court said. The Court emphasized that these elements played a role in the decision to grant bail, but cautioned that the trial court would decide the case independently "uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.".The case concerned the brutal murder of a young woman, allegedly carried out for human sacrifice to bring about material gain. According to the prosecution, Naik conspired with other accused to sacrifice the victim. During the crime, Naik allegedly kept watch while the victim's throat was slit by another co-accused..The charges against Naik include Section 302 (murder), Section 201 (destruction of evidence), Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy), and Section 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, along with Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013. The crime occurred in 2019 and Naik has been in custody for over two years. While the charges were framed, it was pointed out that the trial is it yet to begin.During the hearing, Naik's counsel argued that being over 70 years old and having already spent two years in jail, he should be granted bail. It was also claimed that the statement of a key witness, Aniket Aatkari, recorded three years after the incident, was dubious. His defense highlighted that Aatkari initially failed to mention Naik's involvement but later testified to seeing him at the crime scene. The counsel for the accused further assured the court that Naik would stay outside Satara District until the trial concludes and would comply with all conditions imposed upon him..However, the prosecution strongly opposed the bail application. They argued that Naik had played a significant role in the conspiracy and murder and expressed concerns that granting bail would allow him to influence witnesses or abscond, thereby obstructing the course of justice. The prosecution contended that Naik posed a risk to the ongoing investigation and trial.After considering the arguments, the Court granted bail to Naik on conditions that he must execute a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one or two sureties in the like amount, attend the nearest police station once a month until the trial is completed, and inform the police of any changes to his address or contact details. Additionally, Naik was ordered not to enter Satara District except to attend court proceedings and was prohibited from tampering with evidence or contacting witnesses..[Read Order]