LAMULAL DAVID SHEPHARD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEAD body of Chandrakant Dalvi was noticed by Police Patil of village Davdi, lying in ghat within limits of Dhamantek and he telephonically informed the police station officer of Khed Police Station. Thereafter, Head Constable Shri Adhari went to the spot and found some injuries on the dead body and, therefore, complaint was lodged on 27-2-1997 in Khed Police Station, on the basis of which FIR was registered under Section 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. During the Course of investigation statement of one Prakash Laxman Chavan and Vilas Devkar came to be recorded on 12th May 1997, which disclosed that amongst others, the present petitioner was one accompanying the deceased in a track of white colour and going away with Landge family with whom, Dalvi family was having property dispute. These statements were, however, recorded after arrest of the petitioner in a hotel at Satara. Petitioner has applied for grant of bail to Sessions Court, Pune, but same came to be rejected and, therefore, he has filed the present application.

(2.) SHRI Kocharekar for the petitioner submitted that other accused viz. Kaluram Landge and Anil Landge had also filed Criminal Application No.3230/97 to this Court for grant of bail and this Court (Parkar, J.) on 4th December 1997 granted bail in favour of those petitioners. It is also pointed out that three months after the incident name of the petitioner came to be disclosed and the only material that he was last seen with the deceased along with others, is on record. As such, there is no prima facie material against the petitioner for his involvement in the commission of murder of Chandrakant Dalvi.

(3.) AFTER hearing both sides and perusing papers of investigation, I find that the only material against the petitioner is he was last seen with deceased while going in tracks of white colour in which some other persons were also there. However, this material is coming on 12th May 1997, for the first time. On 26th February 1997 statement of the brother of the deceased has been recorded where in he has stated about Chandrakant going along with Landge and others in tracks, but had not stated name of the petitioner and Shri Kocharekar submitted that the petitioner has been staying in the same locality in which deceased and other witnesses reside and there is no reason why brother of the deceased should omit name of the petitioner. Having regard to the nature of the evidence available, I find this to be a fit case to grant bail on stringent conditions.