KISHANDAS NARSINGDAS BAIRAGI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri P. M. Pradhan, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. S. S. Keluskar, the learned Public Prosecutor, for the State. Perused the relevant papers of investigation including the statements of witnesses.

(2.) No doubt the witnesses alleged that all the four accused persons came together, entered the shop and atleast three of them assaulted the complainant and other witnesses. The motive as alleged by the prosecution refers to the promise given by one of the accused i.e. accused No. 2 to sell a wrist watch for which he had obtained an amount of Rs. 130, from complainants brother Chhotu and he was insisting on the accused No. 2 either to give wrist watch or refund the amount, which enraged the accused. The prosecution allege that after entering the shop, accused No. 1 assaulted the deceased on head and this was followed by accused No. 3 who also assaulted the deceased on head, questioning the witnesses as to why they are demanding the money. When witness Chhotu tried to intervene accused No. 2 assaulted him with a stick on the head. Positive overt acts are thus attributed to accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 alleging that they have assaulted two victims on the head with sticks. The deceased sustained such a serious injury that he succumbed to the same while Chhotu sustained a serious injury though luckily he survived. There is thus positive material against accused Nos. 1 to 3, making out a case of individual act as well as that of common intention. It was faintly suggested on behalf of the accused that they had no intention to liquidate the deceased, but merely to punish him. This involves the process of appreciation of evidence which can well be left to the Session Court at the trial. Prima facie, however, the totality of circumstances are obviously against these accused persons. The learned Public Prosecutor, Smt. Keluskar, also rightly submitted that the ads are high-handed inasmuch as in a broad day light they entered the shop of the complainant and resorted to violence which according to the prosecution was a pre-determined act because they had entered the shop with that motive and were armed with sticks. The witnesses also apprehend danger at the hands of these three accused if they are enlarged on bail and it is right apprehended further that the evidence may be tampered with.

(3.) Having regard to all these features, atleast to the prima facie field of this bail application, no concession of liberty can be granted to accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 as has been rightly done by the learned Sessions Judge.