SANDIP KALANGUTKAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri J. P. D' Souza, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and Ms. Milena Pinto, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, appearing for the Respondents.

(2.) The above application is filed by the Applicant for bail on the ground that the Applicant was arrested by the Respondent Police Station on 16.05.2011 under Section 143, 147, 148, 302 and 307 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code in F.I.R. no. 73/2011 and thereafter was lodged at the Respondent Police Station. It is further his case that it is alleged by the Respondent that on 03.04.2011 between 3.00 hours to 4.00 hours, near Club Virgin, Gauravaddo, Calangute, Bardez, Goa, the Applicant along with the other accused with the common object formed an unlawful assembly armed with spanners and in furtherance with their common object assaulted one Ravi Rajan V. and his driver by name Sunil with slaps, fist blows, etc., and further assaulted the said Ravi Rajan V. and his driver said Sunil with spanners causing injuries on the head and on such account, the said Ravi Rajan V. suffered grievous injuries and said Sunil succumbed to the injuries. It is further the contention of the Applicant that during the investigation he showed willingness to make full disclosure of the true facts leading to the crime and made a request to the Respondent Police to declare him as an approver witness. It is his case that the Respondent Police Station moved an application before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panaji, and that by Order dated 28.06.2011, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate acting on the statement recorded by the Spl. Judicial Magistrate, granted pardon to the Applicant under Section 306 of the Cr. P.C. It is further his case that an application under Section 307 of the Cr.P.C. Came to be filed upon which the learned Addl. Sessions Judge remitted the matter back to record fresh statement of the Applicant by the Spl. Judicial Magistrate under Section 306 of the Cr.P.C. It is further the case of the Applicant that such statement of the Applicant came to be recorded on 21.11.2011. It is further his case that after the charge came to be filed, the Applicant was examined as Pw.1 by the prosecution and was also cross examined by the Advocates appearing for the other Accused. The Applicant thereafter filed an application for bail before the learned Sessions Judge which came to be rejected by Order dated 23.02.2012. Thereafter, an application came to be filed before this Court for bail which came to be disposed of by Order dated 16.04.2012, inter alia, permitting the Applicant to file a fresh application for bail after three crucial witnesses claimed by the Respondent were examined within a period of four months. Thereafter, two of the Accused in the said crime filed an application for bail before this Court being Criminal Application (Bail) No. 84/2012 which was disposed of by Order dated 08.05.2012 whereby the said Accused nos. 2 and 4 in the said case were granted bail subject to conditions stipulated therein. It is further brought to my notice by the Applicant that thereafter, another Accused being Accused no. 3 also filed an application for bail which came to be granted by the learned Sessions Judge by Order dated 07.06.2012. The Applicant as such filed the present application praying that he be released on bail.

(3.) The Respondents have filed their reply admitting the fact that some of the Accused have been granted bail. A reply came to be filed on 16.05.2012 by the Respondents objecting the grant of bail on the ground that the Applicant may tamper or instill fear in the minds of the prosecution witnesses. When the matter came for hearing of the above application, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has filed another reply on behalf of the Respondents dated 18.06.2012, inter alia, stating that the Accused nos. 2, 3 and 4 have been granted bail and that in view of the Order passed by this Court in Criminal Application No. 246 of 2009, the above application may be considered and condition be imposed that the Applicant shall remain present before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Mapusa, at the time of the trial on every date of hearing and shall not leave the State of Goa without prior permission from the Court.