DATTA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants are seeking bail in connection with crime No. 126 of 2020 registered with Kasarshirshi police station, District Latur for the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 326 , 324 , 323 , 506 , 337 , 143 , 147 , 148 , 149 of I.P.C. and under Section 135 of Maharashtra Police Act. Their Criminal Misc. Bail application bearing No. 55 of 2020 with similar prayer came to be rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nilanga vide order dated 09.09.2020.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicants submits that investigation is over and charge sheet has been submitted. The applicants are in jail since 24.5.2020 in connection with the present crime. Learned counsel submits that the incident is two fold. On 23.5.2020 when the co-accused Vidyaman Barmade had been to village Bolegaon, Taluka Nilanga, District Latur alongwith his truck from the State of Uttar Pradesh, the informant and the President of Litigation Free Village, namely, Prakash Mane and other persons objected his very entry in the village and further requested him to stay away from the village. However, co-accused Vidyaman Barmade and his relatives, which include the present applicants, refused to stay away from the village. Learned counsel submits that allegedly the second incident had taken place in the night between 23.5.2020 and 24.5.2020 at about 2.30 a.m. It has been alleged in the complaint that co-accused Vidyaman Barmade had given a blow of knife on the chest of father of the informant deceased Shahaji Kisan Patil and co-accused Bharat Solanke had given a blow of knife on the abdomen of the cousin of the informant, namely, deceased Vaibhav Patil. Learned counsel submits that though names of the applicants are mentioned in the F.I.R., however, general allegations have been made against them. Learned counsel submits that supplementary statement of the informant came to be recorded on 27.5.2020, wherein it has been specifically stated by the informant that so far as the incident occurred on 23.5.2020, when the informant and the President of Litigation Free Village had objected the entry of co-accused Vidyaman Barmade in the village, said co-accused refused to accept their request. It has been further stated by the informant in his supplementary statement that the second incident had taken place at about 8.00 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. in the agricultural land when co-accused Vidyaman Barmade and Avinash Mane approached to them under the influence of liquor and abused them for restricting their entry in the village and at that time the present applicants came there and pacified the quarrel. Learned counsel submits that so far as the second incident occurred at about 8.00 p.m. to 8.30 p.m., the informant in his supplementary statement has accepted that both the applicants had tried to pacify the matter and they were not the assailants. In the night between 23.5.2020 and 24.5.2020 at about 2.00 a.m. to 2.30 a.m., when the third and the main incident had taken place, the informant for the first time had made allegations against the applicants. It has been alleged that the applicant Ganesh Datta Mane had extended beating to the informant with fist and kick blows and applicant Datta Raosaheb Mane pelted stones on him and one stone hit on his toe. Learned counsel submits that there are no injuries on the toe of the informant. Except one injury caused by bite, there are no other injuries on his person as per the medico legal certificate. Learned counsel submits that there are four injured eye witnesses viz. Sagar Shahaji Patil, Bharat Shahaji Patil, Shridhar Chandar Patil etc. However, those injured witnesses have neither taken names of the applicants, nor ascribed any specific role to them. Learned counsel submits that even the independent witnesses like Annarao Piraji Mane have also not taken names of the applicants about their presence at the time of the main incident. Learned counsel submits that though the offence is serious and it is a case of double murder, however, the applicants came to be implicated in connection with the present crime with some ulterior motive. There is no criminal history. The applicants are available for trial. They are ready to abide any conditions, if imposed by this Court. The applicants may be released on bail.

(3.) Learned A.P.P. has strongly resisted the application on the ground that the incident had taken place in the night between 23.5.2020 and 24.5.2020 at about 2.30 a.m. and immediately in the morning at about 6.47 a.m., the complaint came to be lodged. It is a case of double murder. The incident, as alleged in the complaint and as revealed during the course of investigation, had taken place in front of the house of deceased. Learned A.P.P. submits that co- accused Vidyaman Barmade and other accused persons including the applicants formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common unlawful object, the said assembly assaulted the deceased and other persons including the informant and the injured witnesses in front of their house. Prima facie, there is evidence about formation of an unlawful assembly. The informant has mentioned names of the applicants in the F.I.R. and in the supplementary statement he has elaborately stated about their specific role. Learned A.P.P. submits that there is possibility of tampering with the prosecution evidence. The application may be rejected.