BHARAT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant in criminal application no.1538 of 2020. For the reasons stated in the application, criminal application is allowed and the applicant is allowed to assist the learned APP while conducting the hearing of bail application no.840 of 2020. Criminal application no.1538 of 2020 is disposed off.

(2.) The applicants are seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No.103 of 2020 registered with Tadkalas Police Station, District Parbhani for the offences punishable under sections 302 , 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Their applications with similar prayer bearing Criminal MA No.598 of 2020 and 599 of 2020 came to be rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani vide order dated 7.8.2020.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is no direct evidence in this case and even there is no circumstantial evidence against the applicants. The applicants are in jail between 12.6.2020 and 5.7.2020. The applicants have been arrested in connection with the present crime merely on suspicion. Learned counsel submits that there is a reference about the quarrel between the applicants and the deceased on account of some agricultural way leading to their respective agricultural land, however, the same is not suffcient to connect the applicants with the crime. Learned counsel submits that as per the allegations made in the FIR, deceased was found lying in injured condition near the fencing and cause of death as per the opinion given by the Medical offcer who has conducted the postmortem examination is electrocution. Learned counsel submits that though the informant has cleverly suppressed the fact about electrifying the fencing erected by the deceased around his agricultural land, however, there are adjacent agricultural land holders who have stated before the police that deceased himself has electrifed his fencing erected by him around his agricultural land to save his crops from the wild pigs. Learned counsel submits that on perusal of the order passed by the trial Court, it appears that one bundle of wire which is 200 feet in length came to be seized during the investigation. It has also came in the statement of the witnesses that distance between the wire fencing around agricultural land of the deceased and the electricity point in the land of the applicants is near about 415 feets. Learned counsel submits that the applicants are merely arrested on suspicion and there is no evidence against them. It is also not clear as to whether the deceased died a homicidal death or he accidentally died due to electrocution in the fencing wire of his own land. The applicants are agriculturists having no criminal history. They are available for trial. Their further detention in jail under the pretext that charge-sheet is yet not fled is unwarranted and uncalled for. The applicants may be released on bail.