Tue Dec 23 19:28:07 UTC 2025: Here’s a summary of the text and a rewritten version as a news article:

Summary:

The Bombay High Court dismissed bail applications from four individuals accused in the April 2020 Palghar lynching case. The court cited the seriousness of the crime and their involvement as reasons for denying bail, despite the accused already being incarcerated for over five years and arguments for parity with previously bailed co-accused. The accused were allegedly part of a mob that killed two seers and their driver, mistakenly believing them to be child abductors. The court noted evidence of the accused’s violent acts, including inciting the mob, attacking the victims and police, and destruction of property. While acknowledging the importance of individual liberty, the court prioritized public interest and the severity of the charges. The CBI has been directed to expedite its investigation, after which the accused can renew their bail applications.

News Article:

Bombay High Court Denies Bail to Four Accused in 2020 Palghar Lynching

Mumbai, December 24, 2025 – The Bombay High Court on Tuesday rejected bail applications for Rajesh Dhakal Rao, Sunil Satya Shantaram Dalvi, Sajanya Barkya Burkud, and Vinod Ramu Rao, all accused in the brutal Palghar lynching case that occurred in April 2020. The decision, delivered by Justice Neela Gokhale, emphasizes the gravity of the alleged offenses and the accused’s direct involvement in the mob violence that resulted in the deaths of two seers, Kalpavrikshagiri Maharaj and Sushilgiri Maharaj, along with their driver, Nilesh Telgade.

The incident took place in Gadchinchle village during the COVID-19 lockdown. A mob of villagers, reportedly numbering between 400 and 500, attacked the trio, falsely believing them to be child abductors. The accused face charges including murder, criminal conspiracy, rioting, and assault on public servants, in addition to violations of the Disaster Management Act, Epidemic Diseases Act, and Maharashtra Police Act.

Defense attorneys argued for bail based on parity with 42 other co-accused who have already been released and the prolonged incarceration of their clients, who have been in custody for over five years. They claimed the attack was a spontaneous mob action without premeditated intent to kill.

However, Special Public Prosecutor Amit Munde, representing the CBI, presented compelling evidence of the accused’s specific actions during the lynching. Evidence showed the defendants actively inciting the mob, attacking the victims with stones and axes, obstructing police intervention, and damaging vehicles. Witnesses identified the accused as key participants in the assault.

Justice Gokhale dismissed the parity argument, citing Supreme Court precedent that individual bail decisions must be made based on the specific circumstances of each accused. The court balanced the right to individual liberty with the public interest, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges, which carry a potential sentence of life imprisonment or death.

“Taking into consideration the nature, gravity and seriousness of the offence, this is not a fit case nor in the interest of justice, that the Applicants should be enlarged on bail,” the court stated in its order.

The court directed the CBI, which took over the investigation in August 2025, to expedite its inquiry. The accused will be able to renew their bail applications once the CBI files its report before the trial court. The case continues to be closely watched, raising questions about mob violence and justice in India.

Read More