High Court · 2024
Facts
ba-880.24+.odt1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADBAIL APPLICATION NO.880 OF 2024Govind S/o Shankar Redewad,Age-35 years, Occu:Agri.,R/o-Barbada, Taluka-Naigaon,District-Nanded. ...APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra,Through Police Station Kuntur,District-Nanded. ...RESPONDENT ... Mr. Suraj R. Bagal Advocate for Applicant. Mr. S.B Narwade, A.P.P. for Respondent – State. … AND BAIL APPLICATION NO.843 OF 2024 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2272 OF 2024Pawan S/o Prabhakar Machanwad,Age-21 years, Occu:Tractor Driver,R/o-Barbada, Taluka-Naigaon,District-Nanded. ...APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra,Through Police Inspector,Police Station Kuntur,Taluka- Naigaon, District-Nanded. ...RESPONDENT
Legal Reasoning
ba-880.24+.odt7case. The gravity of the offence is important factor whiledeciding the bail application. The overall evidence collectedagainst the applicants and their relationship with deceased issufficient to believe that prima facie case is made out against theapplicants. Only the discrepancies, as pointed out by the learnedcounsel for the applicants, would not entitle the applicants to getthe bail.10.For the above reasons, all the bail applications standdismissed. 11.Criminal Application Nos. 2272 of 2024 and 2274 of 2024stand disposed of. [ S.G. MEHARE, J. ] asb/JULY24
Arguments
ba-880.24+.odt2 ... Mr. Ashish Balaji Shinde Advocate for Applicant in Bail Application No. 843 of 2024. Mr. S.B Narwade, A.P.P. for Respondent – State. Mr. Upendra B. Bilolikar Advocate for Applicant in Criminal Application No.2272 of 2024 … AND BAIL APPLICATION NO.862 OF 2024 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2274 OF 2024Chakradhar S/o Digambar Shinde,Age-32 years, Occu:Agri.,R/o-Barbada, Taluka-Naigaon,District-Nanded. ...APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra,Through Police Inspector,Kuntur Police Station,District-Nanded. ...RESPONDENT ... Mr. Santosh C. Bhosle Advocate for Applicant in Bail Application No. 862 of 2024. Mr. S.B Narwade, A.P.P. for Respondent – State. Mr. Upendra B. Bilolikar Advocate for Applicant in Criminal Application No.2274 of 2024 … AND BAIL APPLICATION NO.994 OF 2024 Madhav S/o Parasram Rathod,Age-32 years, Occu:Agriculture,R/o-Krushnur, Taluka-Naigaon,District-Nanded. ...APPLICANT ba-880.24+.odt3 VERSUS The State of Maharashtra,Through Kuntur Police Station,Taluka- Naigaon, District-Nanded. ...RESPONDENT ... Mr. Anil M. Gaikwad Advocate for Applicant. Mr. D.J. Patil, A.P.P. for Respondent – State. ... CORAM: S.G. MEHARE, J. DATE : 2nd JULY 2024 ORDER :1.All these applications are arising out of the same crime.Hence, taken up together for orders.2.The applicants are seeking bail in Crime No.0005 of 2024registered with Police Station, Kuntur, District-Nanded for theoffence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 143 of theIndian Penal Code.3.The prosecution has a case that the deceased andapplicants were friends. The deceased was beheaded, tied to themotorbike with the wire and thrown in the river. The familymembers of the deceased had initially lodged a missing report.The police were searching for him. However, after around 2 and½ months, the incident was discovered. The prosecution case is ba-880.24+.odt4based upon the ‘last seen together’ and recovery of the deadbody at the instance of co-accused Govind. The prosecution hasevidence that the accused Govind called the deceased soonbefore he left the house and thereafter he was missing.4.It is really a brutal murder. The body was decomposed.However, the dead body was identified from the colour of clothesdeceased wore. The piece of wire used for tying the deceased tothe motorbike has been recovered at the instance of co-accusedGovind. DNA Test Report is awaited. The prosecution hascollected the oral evidence of ‘last seen together’.5.The respective counsels for the accused tried their levelbest to convince the Court that there was an inordinate delay inlodging the report. Since the missing report was lodged, therewas no reason to suspect the accused/applicants. There was aserious discrepancy about the ‘last seen together’ theory. Thewitnesses at one place say that the deceased left home onreceiving a phone call, and the same witness at the other placesays that he saw the deceased in the company of the accused atthe bus stand. The police have recorded the statement of onewitness who disclosed that the deceased was with one SahebraoMaddewad. However, his statement was not recorded. Readingthe statements in their entirety, the arguments were advanced ba-880.24+.odt5that Sahebrao was the prime witness who knew the deceased.As far as phone calls are concerned, those are the routine callsas they were friends. No inference can be drawn from those callsthat the deceased was called with the intention to kill. Only onweak circumstantial evidence should they not languish in jail.They are young boys having no antecedents to their discredit.6.In addition thereto, learned counsel for accused Pawanargued that on the alleged day of the incident, there wasmarriage ceremony in the village; hence, it was impossible forthe applicants to identify the persons last seen with thedeceased. Whatever evidence collected is not sufficient to linkthe accused with the incident. The applicant, being a friend ofthe deceased, has been falsely implicated in the crime. There aredifferent versions of motive in different places. That also raisesserious doubt about the prosecution case. Since the investigationhas been completed, he prayed for bail.7.Learned APPs have strongly opposed the applications. Theyhave referred to the CDR reports and the recovery of the wire atthe instance of one of the co-accused. It is their contention thatthe piece of wire recovered at the instance of the co-accusedmatches with the wire by which the dead body was tied to themotorbike. The dead body was completely decomposed. One ba-880.24+.odt6independent witness stated that on the day of the incident, hesaw the applicants and deceased in a field in the light of hismotorbike. He has explained the reasons for not disclosing theincident immediately. Naturally, nobody doubted the company asthey were all friends. Therefore, he did not feel it appropriate todisclose the facts to the police as, on that day, nobody knew thatsuch an incident would happen or happened. The colour of theclothes, which the independent witness disclosed, matches withthe clothes recovered from the person of the deceased. Theyhave prayed to dismiss the applications.8.Though the learned counsels for the accused have triedtheir level best to convince that discrepancies are there, whichraises doubt, the fact remains that the dead body was foundbeheaded and tied to the motorbike. The last call was therebetween the accused, Govind, and the deceased, when he leftthe house. At this juncture, the Court has not to examine thestatement of the witnesses as if it is a trial. The Court shouldprima facie satisfy that there is some material to believe theprosecution case as probable. Examination and non-examinationof the witnesses is subject to explanation. 9.The witnesses would explain the discrepancies, and theTrial Court would assess whether it is fatal to the prosecution