BABANRAO LAKSHMANRAO PANDIT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants in both the applications are seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No. 217 of 2020 registered with Gangakhed Police Station, District Parbhani, for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307 read with 34 of IPC . Their application with similar prayer bearing Criminal M.A. (Bail) Nos. 164 of 2020 and 163 of 2020 respectively, came to be rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gangakhed, District Parbhani, by orders dated 24.08.2020.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicants in both the applications submits that though names of the applicants are mentioned in the FIR with a specific role attributed to each of them, the allegations have been made mainly against co- accused Bhaiyya Jadhav. Learned counsel submits that as per the allegations made in the FIR, on 30.04.2020 at about 7.30 p.m., a quarrel took place between deceased Gaus and co- accused Bhaiyya Jadhav and thereafter, co-accused Bhaiyya Jadhav left that place on a motorcycle and returned to that place within 15 to 20 minutes along with applicant Akbar on motorcycle. Learned counsel submits that though there are allegations against applicant Akbar that he caught hold of deceased Gaus when co-accused Bhaiyya was inflicting injuries on the person of deceased Gaus with the help of knife, however, it has been revealed during investigation that applicant Akbar was without any weapon. Learned counsel submits that it is not clear from the allegations made in the complaint, so also not revealed during the course of investigation, that the present applicant Akbar had shared the said intention of co-accused Bhaiyya Jadhav. So far as applicant Babanrao is concerned, it has been alleged that he was holding a black colour pipe in his hand and also extended beating to deceased Gaus with the help of said black pipe. However, apart from the stab injuries, there are abrasions on the toe of deceased Gaus. There is no injury on his person caused with the help of hard and blunt object like an iron pipe. Further, co-accused Bhaiyya had assaulted injured witness Kalim Pathan and caused him injury with the help of knife, the said co-accused Bhaiyya is still behind bars. As per the allegations made in the complaint, one Sanjay Parave is the conspirator. However, he has been released on bail by this Court. Applicant Akbar is a young person having no criminal history. Furthermore, the antecedents of applicant Babanrao are also clear. Both the applicants are having a fixed place of residence. They are available for trial. The applicants are ready to abide any conditions, if imposed by this Court.

(3.) Learned APP has strongly resisted the applications on the ground that there are eye witnesses to the incident and the informant and said Kalim Pathan are the injured witnesses. Learned APP submits that so far as applicant Akbar is concerned, there is an overt act on his part to caught hold of deceased Gaus at the time of the incident so as to facilitate commission of crime and as a result thereof, co-accused Bhaiyya had inflicted injuries on the person of deceased Gaus with the help of knife. Learned APP submits that applicant Babanrao was also holding a black colour pipe in his hands and he had also extended beating to deceased Gaus. Learned APP submits that the applicants and the co- accused have shared common intention. There is a strong prima facie case against the applicants. There is possibility of tampering with the prosecution evidence if the applicants are released on bail. Both the applications are liable to be rejected.