KARIM AJIJ CHABUKSWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE application for grant of bail filed by the petitioner was previously rejected by the Sessions Court, Sangli as well as by this court on 18-12-1995. It appears that charge-sheet was thereafter filed and the petitioner again applied to the Sessions Court, Sangli for grant of bail and that application came to be rejected on 11th March 1996 by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge Sangli and that is how the present application has been filed.

(2.) IT appears from the papers that Ranjana alias Mangala is the wife of the deceased and their marriage had taken place some twenty years back. Out of this marriage, the deceased had three children viz., Snehal Sheetal & Shyamal. Snehal is married and Kalpana is his wife. Ranjana alias Managala had illicit relations with the petitioner and in fact by deserting the deceased, she had gone to stay with the petitioner as his wife. She had also filed proceedings for maintenances against the deceased in Miraj Court. Later on, seven months before this incident Ranjana had come to stay with the deceased and with children at the intervention on Snehal when she regretted for her act and assured to behave properly. However, the deceased was not talking to Ranjana nor was taking the food cooked by her. In the wake of these facts, on the night of 29/9/1995 the deceased had gone to his duty while two sons Shyamal and Sheetal had gone to college. They returned from college at 12.30 p.m. Shyamal and deceased used to sleep on a cot in the while others used to sleep in the bed room. On that day the deceased returned home at about 10 p.m. and after that he went to the room where Shyamal was sleeping and just patted him while he was asleep. Thereafter about one hour after that Ranjana pushed Shyamal from his bed and said that some assailants had come and dragged him to the bath room where already Snehal, Sheetal and Snehal's wife were also there. She told that assailants are assaulting deceased and, therefore, they should keep quiet inside the bath room. Later on in the morning at 5 a.m. she opened the door of the bed room and all of then saw that the deceased was lying unconscious with number of injuries. Then a doctor from the next door was called. He advised that the family doctor be called and family doctor on arrival reported that Laxman, the father of the complainant was dead. Then First Information Report came to be lodged on 30-9-1995. Offence came to be registered and during the course of investigation, statements of complainant Shyamal and other inmates in the house were recorded. It was found that the present petitioner had come to the house in the evening was further he was seen entering the bed room at about 8.30 p.m. by Snehal's wife Kalpana. On the strength of this evidence, it was found that the petitioner was the person who had committed the murder of the deceased with the help of Ranjana and, therefore, both of them came to be arrested.

(3.) IT was also submitted that taking the evidence as it is, the conviction of the petitioner is not at all possible and, therefore, this is a fit case for review of the order passed by this court previously. It may be that the petitioner may not have been supplied with the copies of the papers of investigation but from the judgment recorded by Sahai J., I find that all the aforesaid circumstances were considered by him and thereafter the application of the petitioner came to be rejected with the following observations: