Kamalkant Maheshchand Saini v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.113 OF 2019 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.893 OF 2018 KAMALKANT MAHESHCHAND SAINI )...APPLICANT V/s.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA )...RESPONDENT Mr.Anil Kharatmol, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr.Amit Palkar, APP for the Respondent - State.

CORAM

:

A. M. BADAR, J.

DATE :

26th AUGUST 2019 P.C. :

This is an application for suspension of sentence and releasing the applicant/accused on bail during pendency of the appeal filed by him. The applicant/accused is convicted of the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act. He is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years apart from avk 1/4

imposition of fine of Rs.10,000/- and default sentence of simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Rigorous imprisonment for 3 years apart from some fine and default sentence is awarded on him for offences punishable under Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant/accused. He argued that the applicant/accused is a young boy of 19 years of age and the alleged victim of the crime in question is his relative. The applicant/accused had been to Mumbai for attending examination of recruitment in railway. There was love affair between the parties and father of the applicant/accused was in government service. The applicant/ accused is behind bars from 3 years, and therefore, he needs to be released on bail.

The learned APP opposed the application.

avk 2/4

The incident in question took place at the house of the victim of the crime in question namely PW2 Mamta Mourya. The applicant/accused is her relative. The applicant/accused used to visit her house on the pretext of giving examination for recruitment in government department. The incident took place on 18th March 2016. The applicant/accused insisted the victim i.e. PW2 Mamta Mourya to marry him. PW2 Mamta refused and therefore, the applicant/accused fired at her neck from point blank range.

Evidence of PW4 Dr.Yogesh Parmar shows following injuries on the neck of PW2 Mamta Mourya :

"i) Entry wound of fire arm on right side of neck measuring 4 x 3 x 2 cm with the margin of blackish tattooing around the entry wound. Said injury was at the distance of 3 cm from right side mastoid process and 1 cm below inferior border of mandible of right side.

ii) Cut wound over left eyebrow measuring 1 x 0.5 cm."

avk 3/4

Apart from testimony of the victim, PW1 Babita Mourya is an eye witness to the incident in question.

Considering the nature of evidence and the degree of criminality shown by the applicant/accused, though he has spent 3 years in jail, the applicant/accused is not entitled to be released in bail. Therefore, the order :

ORDER

i) The application is rejected.

ii) Hearing of the appeal is expedited.

(A. M. BADAR, J.) avk 4/4