ATUL AMRUT MOHITE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been moved by the applicant under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime No.121 of 2016 registered with Police Station Dighi, Pune, for offences punishable under Sec. 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 363, 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), under Sec. 4(25) of the Arms Act and under Sec. 37(1) read with 135 of Maharashtra Police Act.

(2.) The prosecution case in nutshell is that on 15/7/2016, at about 3.30 a.m., Shubham Fuge, informant and son of Dattatraya (deceased for short) lodged report contending that on 14th July 2016 a phone call was received by him from applicant requesting him to bring his father i.e. the deceased for the birthday of one of his friend at Dighi. At about 11.30 p.m., while the informant along with his friend, namely, Rohan Panchal, was proceeding towards Dighi, the informant saw his father being assaulted by the applicant in an open space with a huge stone on the head and further saw accused Babu Walke assaulting his father with a stone. It is further alleged that Babu Walke was accompanied by his two nephews - one who was armed with sattur was assaulting the deceased and the other person was armed with sword and he was assaulting the deceased with a sword. It is further alleged that accused Shailesh was assaulting the deceased with fist and kick blows and Prem Dholpuria was assaulting the deceased with some deadly weapon. Similarly, accsued Babu Walke had assaulted with a chopper and all of them were accompanied by another two persons. All the assailants then fled from the spot.

(3.) Mr.Jahagirdar, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that seven accused have already been released on bail. One of them is accused Sushant. The role of said accused Sushant and that of the applicant is similar. The learned counsel also invited my attention to the statement of Mahesh Suryawanshi, who according to him, is a chance witness and his statement is not consistent with the statement of the informant. Thus, for all these reasons, the applicant deserves to be released on bail, argued learned counsel.