High Court
Facts
961-ba-1904-2024.odt(1)IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADBAIL APPLICATION NO. 1904 OF 2024Raju Bhagwat SuryawanshiVERSUSThe State Of Maharashtra...Advocate for Applicant : Mr. S.S. Deshmukh h/f Mr. Atul MadhavPawar P.P. for Respondent/State : Mr. A.B. GiraseAdvocate for Complainant/Victim : Mr. V.D. Sapkal, Senior Counseli/b S.R. Sapkal a/w Mr. R.N. PatilWITHCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4448 OF 2024 IN BA/1904/2024... CORAM : S.G. MEHARE, J. DATED : OCTOBER 25, 2024PER COURT:-1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learnedGovernment Pleader for the State and learned counsel for the victim. 2.The applicant seeks bail in Crime No.118 of 2024registered with Bhusawal City Police Station, District Jalgaon forthe offences punishable under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148, 149, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3/25, 27 and 7/25 of the ArmsAct and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.3.Admittedly, the applicant was not the participant in theactual assault. Two lives were claimed in this crime. The firearmswere used. There were 29 rounds. The bullets were removed from
Legal Reasoning
961-ba-1904-2024.odt(5)common man. The common man could not dare to go against suchanti-social elements. Though the applicant has been acquitted inmost of the crimes, his character could not be free from stigma. Suchan offence registered against the applicant shows his conduct and theinterest in the crimes. He does such type of crimes to create terror inthe locality and to keep his political life alive. Still few serious casesare pending against him. He is already convicted. So, these factsshould be considered while deciding the bail application. He alsoargued that the incident happened in the daylight. Such brutalmurders creates the terror in the locality and deprive the commonman from enjoying their free and liberal life which is indirectly anattack on the democratic liberty. Such persons, in fact, should beeliminated from the election process atleast to live a peaceful andsecured the life to the common man. He also argued that the entirematerial collected against him prima facie is sufficient to link himwith the crime. There is a direct evidence of conspiracy. There was apolitical rivalry. The applicant does not want to have a person whomay over power him. In sum and substance, he would submit that hisback history of involvement in various body offences and arm offencesis a ground to refuse him bail, particularly in the election period.Referring to the papers, he would submit that the applicant is themain conspirator. He also argued that the applicant has misused theliberty granted to him by the Court by allowing him bail. So, there is 961-ba-1904-2024.odt(6)great possibility of violating the bail conditions and he may spread theterror in the vicinity. For all these grounds, he should not be grantedbail. 6.Learned senior counsel Mr. Sapkal for the victim hasadopted most of the arguments advanced by the learned PublicProsecutor. However, he would argue that bad character of theapplicant should be borne in mind while considering the bailapplication. It was a brutal murder committed in daylight. Theassailants had no enmity with the deceased. They were puppet at thehands of the applicant. Hence, in natural course, they were utteringthat the applicant is their boss. He would submit that the materialplaced on record is sufficient to establish his nexus with such a seriouscrime. He also referred to the post-mortem report to point out thenature of the injuries caused to the deceased. Committing the crimewith firearms is presumed to be a predetermined crime. Hence, heshould not be granted bail. After considering the argumentsadvanced by each counsel, those are related to the social health of thecountry. However, the Court could not go beyond the record and thematerial against the applicant should be considered and tested againstthe anvil of law. The applicant has been arrested as a mainconspirator in the crime. However, the witnesses who have deposedthat the other co-accused had been to the house of the applicant didnot state the date and time. They were only being asked to stay out 961-ba-1904-2024.odt(7)of the house and have been posed as witnesses to the conspiracy.After getting such an information, there should be some material tobelieve that the conspiracy was plotted. Prima facie, there is nomaterial that there was a serious enmity of the applicant with thedeceased. Nothing is recovered to prima facie establish the nexus ofthe applicant with the crime. On such insufficient evidence, it wouldbe inappropriate to incarcerate the applicant. Every accused ispresumed to be innocent unless he is convicted. However, the lawconfers the provision to arrest for investigation in the crime. Utteringthe words by the co-accused and some of the witnesses that theapplicant is a gangster, seems not sufficient to believe at this juncturethat they were acting at the instance and instructions of the applicant.Learned counsel for the applicant has correctly argued that pendingcrimes against the accused is no ground to refuse the bail. The Courthas to examine the charge sheet and material against the applicant inthe case in which the accused seeks bail. Though there were largenumber of cases registered against the applicant, in most of the cases,he has been acquitted. Hence, those allegations would not help theprosecution to believe that the applicant is the conspirator. He beinga social worker and politician, visiting his home by any person cannotbe presumed to be a visit to plot the conspiracy. After having gonethrough the papers placed with the charge sheet, the Court is notsatisfied that the prosecution has collected satisfactory material to
Arguments
961-ba-1904-2024.odt(2)the body of both deceased. The record reveals that the quarrel tookplace due to the water tanks taken from the ward of the deceased. Sofar as the allegations against the applicant that he was theconspirator, there are witnesses to support the allegations ofconspiracy. The witnesses have specifically stated that few daysbefore the incident, the actual assailants and others had been to thehouse of the applicant and they were asked to wait outside. Some ofthe witnesses were threatened that they should not accompanydeceased Santosh. Pursuant to the statements of the witnesses, theapplicant has been arrested in the crime being the conspirator. 4.Learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently arguedthat the applicant was the Corporator. So, many persons used tocome to his house. He being the social worker has to render theservices to the residents of the town. Barely visiting the co-accused tohis home without the evidence the conspirators hearing theconspiracy, these witnesses could not be believed. These witnesseshave instructions to utter the name of the applicant in theirstatement. In the statement of the witnesses, they were saying thatthe applicant is their boss. One of the accused was calling him Appa.His said nick name was not known to the witness until he went to hishouse with him. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit thatthere was no prehistory to connect the applicant with such a seriouscrime. He being a politician, has deliberately indulged in the crime 961-ba-1904-2024.odt(3)when the assembly election is declared. It is a political conspiracyagainst the applicant to refrain him from his constitutional right tocontest the election or participate in the coming assembly elections.As far as the crimes registered against him, out of 30 crimes broughtto the notice of the Court by the learned Government Pleader andlearned counsel for the victim, in most of the cases the applicant wasacquitted. Presently, only seven cases are pending. Those are alsofalse cases having no involvement of the applicant. Social workersare mostly implicated in the crime out of political rivalry. Except thestatements of the witnesses and the accused that applicant is theirboss, there was no evidence to establish the prima facie nexus of theapplicant with the present crime. He would argue that the politiciansare using the common man for their benefit and the same thinghappened in this case by creating the false evidence against theapplicant. The statement of the co-accused would not bind theapplicant. It can only be a source of information or a clue for theinvestigating officer to investigate the truth. The investigating officerexcept the words as mentioned above, could not collect the evidenceand prima facie establish the nexus of the applicant with the presentcrime. Shortage of water is a burning issue in the country. Peoplefight and go to any extent for water. People might have a feeling thatthe deceased was providing tankers only to the persons of his ward.Whether the applicant had connection with such crime is a matter of 961-ba-1904-2024.odt(4)appreciation of evidence during the trial. Considering the record as awhole, there is no strong prima facie evidence to link the applicantwith the crime. Barely, the crimes against the accused is no ground torefuse bail. The law is settled that the Court should see the roleattributed to the applicant in the crime in which he is claiming bail. Itis very easy to involve a person in any crime. Hence, they are believedto be innocent till they are convicted. He also added that in one of thecases of murder, he was convicted. However, the High Courtconverted the offence of murder under Section 302 into Section 304of the Indian Penal Code. Against the order of the High Court, SpecialLeave Petition has been preferred before the Hon’ble Supreme Courtand it was admitted. Substantive sentence imposed in that case hasbeen suspended. Though the arguments advanced by both opponentscounsel that the applicant has no good character, but his acquittal inlarge number of cases should be considered and that should not beconsidered as a ground to reject bail. He prayed that bail may beallowed. 5.Learned Public Prosecutor submits that there wasprevious enmity. He read the statements of the witnesses who haduttered the words that the applicant is their boss. The statements ofthe witnesses and uttering words by the co-accused were natural.They were neither false or concocted. The applicant has no positivesocial image. Under the garb of the crime, he is relying over the
Decision
961-ba-1904-2024.odt(8)believe that the applicant had plotted the conspiracy to eliminate thedeceased. Hence, the applicant could not be detained further. Hedeserve bail. Hence, the following order :O R D E R(i)Bail Application is allowed.(ii)Applicant, Raju Bhagwat Suryawanshi, be released onbail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.50,000/- (RupeesFifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the likeamount in the above crime, on the conditions that ; (a)The applicant should not tamper with the prosecutionwitnesses and should attend the trial on each and everyeffective date.(b)The applicant should not enter Bhusawal City for twomonths from the date of his release; however, he would be atliberty to participate in the election of the State Assembly, if heseeks candidature only.(iii)Criminal Application No.4448 of 2024 stands disposed of. (S.G. MEHARE, J.)Mujaheed//