SUNIL NIMBA MEMANE 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.278 of 2019 registered with Police Station Junnar, Pune, for offences punishable under Sec. 302, 394 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

(2.) It is the case of prosecution that on 21st November 2019, at about 11.00 a.m., informant and his wife had been to their agricultural field by leaving informant 's aunt, namely, Jijabai, at his house. At about 2.00 p.m. informant came and saw the dead body of Jijabai hanging on the wooden pole of the roof of the house. The informant also noticed that cash amount of Rs.3,000.00 and gold ornaments were also missing. In all, cash amount and ornaments worth Rs.8500.00 were taken away by some unknown person. Accordingly, the complainant lodged the report.

(3.) Mr.V.S.Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the First Information Report (FIR) was basically against one unknown person. The whole case of prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. The only incriminating evidence against the applicant is the disclosure statement allegedly given by him under Sec. 27 of the Evidence Act, pursuant to which ornaments and cash worth Rs.3,000.00 were recovered. However, according to the learned counsel, description of ornaments given in the Seizure Panchnama and as given in the statement of the informant 's wife are not matching. For all these reasons, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.