ABDUL AJIJ LAL MOHAMMAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the notice was made returnable on 7th July, 1999 as per my order dated 30-6-1999 and the notice was waived by the learned A.P.P., when the matter was called out, neither the Investigating Officer nor the learned A.P.P. is present and hence without the assistance of the learned A.P.P., this court is required to decide the matter and accordingly I have heard Shri Nikam, the learned advocate for the petitioners. He took me through the complaint dated 8-1-1999 filed by Vikas Namdev Medhe before the Killa Police Station as well as the statement of Ramdhani Ramlakhan dated 19-1-1999.

(2.) WHILE passing this order Ms.Kantharia, the learned A.P.P. appeared and made her submissions. She waives service of rule.

(3.) DURING investigation it transpired that Ramdhani Ramlakhan approached the police on 19-1-1999 and the police has recorded statement on the very day. Ramdhani is the brother of deceased Sukhraj. In the statement of Ramdhani he discloses about when he had gone to enquire with the tailor about thereabout of his brother and he came to know from the tailor that the police had enquired with tailor in respect of the clothes and thereabout of the deceased on 2-1-1999. It is also found from the statement of Ramdhani that his brother was chitchating with accused Abdul Ajij on 31-12-1998 at about 6.00 p.m. It is found during investigation that all the accused to the crime were arrested by the police on 24-1-1999. In all there were found accused arrested in respect of the offence registered for the offence under sections 302, 201, 364 I.P.C. The application for bail of the applicant and one Kanhaiya Rohidas were moved before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon has on examining the police papers and the contentions raised before him has rejected the application for bail of the applicants. The learned Judge has while rejecting the application observed that there is a strong circumstantial evidence on record against the accused and there is a prima facie case against the accused for the commission of the offence. The learned Judge has also while rejecting the application, observed that the applicant accused are residents of Nepal and if the accused are released they would not attend the trial looking to the seriousness of the offence and accordingly the application for bail was rejected.