YATENDRASINGH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Chitnis the learned Senior Counsel with Mr. Kotwal for the applicant who has been refused to be released on bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Mumbai in Bail Application No.2166 of 2006.

(2.) THE applicant who holds a fire arm licence was employed as a security guard by a private security agency by name "Top Security Services" and in that capacity he was posted for duty at a bungalow named "Mannat Mansion" located at Bandra. Along with him another security guard by name Chandrapratap Singh was also on duty. But the applicant was posted as a gunman, whereas Chandrapratap Singh and another person were posted as guards. On 14/8/2006 while he was on duty, it appears Chandrapratap Singh ridiculed the applicant by asking him why he was sitting in the chair inspite of taking Rs.15000.00 per month as salary and whether his gun was really able to fire. There was some sort of argument between the two and allegedly the applicant took out his revolver and fired pointedly on the chest of the Chadrapratap Singh. Consequently, Chandrapratap Singh died and FIR came to be filed on 15/8/2006. The applicant was taken in custody on 15/8/2006 and on submission of the charge-sheet on 1/11/2006, his bail application came to be rejected on 2/12/2006 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai.

(3.) HAVING regards to the obtaining circumstances and the nature of the offence alleged with the prima facie evidence of the deceased being killed by firing a bullet by the applicant himself, it cannot be said that he must be continued in jail during the trial of the case and more so the reasoning set out by the learned Additional Sessions Judge does not appear to be realistic and the fact that Sunil Singh Raghav, a permanent employee of the Western Railways has undertaken to secure the presence of the accused-applicant before the trial court when the trial commences.