Skip to content

    Bombay High Court Suspends Sentence in Canal Drowning Case

    HC News

    1. Home
    2. /HC News

    Bombay High Court Suspends Sentence in Canal Drowning Case

    The division bench granted bail and stayed the life imprisonment imposed on the mother and her alleged paramour while their criminal appeals are pending.

    Jurisight Desk
    Jul 13, 2026·3 min read
    Bombay High Court Suspends Sentence in Canal Drowning Case

    This article was prepared with AI assistance and reviewed by the Jurisight Desk.


    The Bombay High Court, sitting at its Kolhapur bench, recently passed an order granting bail and suspending the sentence of life rigorous imprisonment imposed on Ashwini Chavan and Sachin Kumbhar. The duo had been convicted by the Sessions Court in Wai, Satara District on 30 January 2025 for the offence of causing the death of Chavan’s ten‑year‑old son by drowning him in a canal. The conviction was based on the prosecution’s case that the child had learnt about the alleged extra‑marital relationship between Chavan and Kumbhar and would have disclosed it to his father, thereby providing a motive for the killing.

    A division bench comprising Justice Milind Jadhav and Justice Nandesh Deshpande examined the interim applications filed by both accused seeking bail and suspension of sentence pending the hearing of their criminal appeals, which were instituted in 2025. In its order dated 3 July 2026, the bench set out the reasons for granting the relief.

    The judges first noted that the evidence led by the prosecution was entirely circumstantial. No direct evidence linking the accused to the act of drowning was placed on record. The prosecution’s theory rested on the alleged motive that the child, having become aware of the affair, would inform Chavan’s husband, prompting the accused to eliminate him to prevent the disclosure.

    Crucially, the bench referred to the testimony of PW‑5, the husband of Ashwini Chavan. According to the record, PW‑5 expressly stated that he was already aware of the alleged extra‑marital relationship between his wife and Sachin Kumbhar. The judges observed that this testimony undermined the prosecution’s motive, as the husband’s prior knowledge rendered the alleged fear of disclosure untenable. Consequently, the motive attributed to the accused was deemed prima facie defeated.

    Advertisement

    While acknowledging that the weakness of the motive does not automatically acquit the accused, the bench emphasized that the ultimate determination of guilt would await the hearing of the criminal appeals. The judges observed that there was little prospect of the appeals being decided in the near future, given the stage of the proceedings.

    In light of the circumstantial nature of the evidence, the undermined motive, and the pendency of the appeals, the bench concluded that continued incarceration would serve no purpose at this stage. Accordingly, it allowed the intervention applications, granted bail to both Chavan and Kumbhar, and suspended the execution of their life sentences until the appeals are finally disposed of.

    The order also recorded the appearances of counsel. Advocates Rizwan Merchant, Sagar Shete, Sultan Khan, Arya Ambulkar and Aditya Raktade appeared for Sachin Kumbhar, while Advocate Shreyas Barsawade represented Ashwini Chavan. The State was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Shrikant Yadav.

    The case is cited as Sachin Shivram Kumbhar vs State of Maharashtra (Interim Application 1905 of 2025), with the Bombay High Court’s judgment reported as 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 328. The bench’s decision underscores the appellate court’s approach to bail and suspension of sentence when the prosecution’s case relies heavily on circumstantial evidence and the alleged motive is contradicted by the testimony of a key witness.

    Explore related legal coverage

    Continue with reporting and analysis connected to this article.

    Browse HC News

    More from this court

    • Kapil Sharma Show Faces Music Copyright Case In Bombay HC

      Bombay High Court

    • 60-Day Deadline for Drug Testing is Mandatory; Delays Help Sub-standard Manufacturers: Bombay High Court

      Bombay High Court

    • "Entire Process Was Rigged": Bombay High Court Quashes Vile Parle Property Sale, Forfeits Bidders' Deposits

      Bombay High Court

    • "Do Eyewitnesses Need Photographic Memory?": SC Slams Bombay HC for Granting Bail in Brutal Caste-Based Murder

      Bombay High Court

    Related legal topics

    • Bombay High Court Stays Coercive Bank Action Against Anil Ambani Citing Flawed Forensic Audit

      Justice Milind Jadhav

    • Accused Need Not Appear Every Date After Sentence Suspension: SC

      Suspension of Sentence

    Advertisement

    Jurisight Desk

    See more from Jurisight →
    Jurisight logoJurisight logo

    Simplifying legal knowledge for professionals and citizens. Your daily source for Supreme Court, High Court, and Business Law updates.

    Platform

    HomeAll ArticlesTop NewsSC UpdatesHC Updates

    Categories

    Business LawConstitutionalCriminal LawCivil LawKnow Your Law

    Weekly Digest

    Join 15,000+ others and get the week's most important legal updates.

    © 2026 Jurisight. All rights reserved.
    Privacy PolicyCookie PolicyCookie ConsentLegal Disclaimer