PRAKASH BHIMRAO NIKALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner had previously applied to this court for grant of bail by Criminal Application No.3217 of 1995 but his application came to be rejected by Justice Sahai and for rejecting the application the learned Judge assigned this reason: "Since the applicant Prakash Nikale has been assigned the role of inflicting fatal injuries on the person of the deceased and was duly identified at the test identification, he does not deserve bail and accordingly, his application for bail stands rejected." In the same order, the other accused viz., Sheshkumar Zha and Sanjay Jaiswal to whom no specific role was attributable came to be granted bail.

(2.) Now this application is filed by Prakash Nikale and Mr.Kadam appearing for the petitioner with the help of papers of investigation pointed out that neither in the statement of Uday Rane nor that of Santoshkumar Tiwari there is any reference to assault by the petitioner with gupti to deceased, Sanjay Karnjkar. These two persons in their statements have stated that the very person holding gupti also assaulted them with gupti and also assaulted the deceased, Sanjay. Now in a test identification, parade held for the purpose of identification accused, Sanjay Jaiswal is identified as the person holding gupti and therefore, reading the statements of these two witnesses along with the test identification parade, it appears that Sanjay Jaiswal was the person holding gupti and gave blow to Uday Rane and deceased and that way the role attributed to the petitioner is not at all supported by the statements of these two persons.

(3.) Having regard to these facts and when other accused viz., Sheshkumar Zha is granted bail, I feel that the petitioner deserves grant of bail. Moreover, right from 1995 the petitioner is in jail and the trial against him has not commenced but this is not the reason for granting bail but is an additional factor taken into consideration.