DADASAHEB Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant is seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No.205 of 2020 registered with Shirdi Police Station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 201 of the IPC. His application with similar prayer came to be rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kopargaon, vide order dated 05.08.2020 in Criminal Bail Application No.216 of 2020.

(2.) The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the prosecution case entirely rests upon the circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence in this case. The learned counsel submits that even there is no motive for the applicant to commit the murder of the deceased. The learned counsel submits that in terms of the confessional statement of co-accused Somnath so also the present applicant though which are not admissible in evidence, it appears that co- accused Somnath was responsible for the incident in question and even there is no whisper about the presence of the present applicant either with the deceased or at the alleged spot of incident. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is recovery of weapon, iron angle at the instance of the applicant, during the course of the investigation and there are blood stains on the said angle. However, the deceased was neither seen alive lastly in the company of the applicant nor there is further connecting evidence against the applicant for the commission of the murder by using the said weapon, iron angle. The learned counsel submits that the applicant has a fixed place of residence. There are no antecedents. The applicant is easily available for trial. The applicant may be released on bail.

(3.) The learned APP has strongly resisted the application on the ground that though the prosecution case rests upon the circumstantial evidence, however, there is evidence to the extent that the deceased had taken the meals in the hotel of the present applicant in the fateful night and thereafter he again came to the hotel, demanded one bottle of beer. It has further revealed during the course of the investigation that on account of said demand of bottle of the beer, at odd night times, the quarrel had taken place and in the said quarrel, the applicant and co-accused Somnath had committed the murder of deceased. The learned APP submits that there is recovery of the iron angle at the instance of the present applicant having blood stains over it and the C.A. report is still awaited. The learned APP submits that even the Medical Officer on making a specific query by the Investigating Officer in this regard, has given the opinion that the injuries as mentioned in column No.17 of the Post Mortem Report are possible by the weapon, iron angle, seized during the course of the investigation at the instance of the present applicant. The learned APP submits that prima facie, there is a case against the applicant. The applicant may not be released on bail.