Bombay High CourtAPPA/535/2017others disposed off

Dharmesh @ Dharmendra Sant Bakshsingh v. The State Of Maharashtra

2017-07-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sandeep Kashinath Shinde,Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.K. Tahilramani4 pages

* 1/4 * 22-APPA-535-2017.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.535 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.319 OF 2017 Dharmesh @ Dharmendra Sant Bakshsingh ......Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra .......Respondent Mr. Kapil Dave i/by Mr. Prajit S. Manjrekar , Advocates for Applicant.

Mr. H.J.Dedhia, APP for Respondent-State.

CORAM :

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, & SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE :

July 13, 2017.

P.C. :

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State.

the learned APP for the State.

The applicant has been mainly convicted under The applicant has been mainly convicted under Section 302 of IPC for causing death of one Vimla on Section 302 of IPC for causing death of one Vimla on 24.4.2014 by strangulation. There is no eye witness to the 24.4.2014 by strangulation. There is no eye witness to the incident. The only evidence against the applicant is that incident. The only evidence against the applicant is that there was recovery of gold chain of the deceased at his there was recovery of gold chain of the deceased at his

* 2/4 * 22-APPA-535-2017.doc instance. As far as this aspect is concerned, the learned instance. As far as this aspect is concerned, the learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that there is only one counsel for the applicant pointed out that there is only one gold chain involved in this case and the evidence of Shivani gold chain involved in this case and the evidence of Shivani who was relative of Vimla shows that when she went to the who was relative of Vimla shows that when she went to the flat of the deceased, chain was around the neck of the flat of the deceased, chain was around the neck of the deceased and the deceased was lying dead.

deceased and the deceased was lying dead.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the evidence of recovery cannot be relied upon in view that the evidence of recovery cannot be relied upon in view of the evidence of pancha witness, namely, P.W.3of the evidence of pancha witness, namely, P.W.3Chandrakant. He drew our attention to paragraph 11 of the Chandrakant. He drew our attention to paragraph 11 of the evidence of the pancha witness who has stated that when evidence of the pancha witness who has stated that when he went to the police station, police told him that some he went to the police station, police told him that some clothes and some gold chains are to be recovered. Police clothes and some gold chains are to be recovered. Police told him that they have to go to Sundarwadi.

It was told him that they have to go to Sundarwadi. It was submitted that this shows that the police were already submitted that this shows that the police were already aware of what was to be recovered, hence, circumstance of aware of what was to be recovered, hence, circumstance of recovery does not appear to be genuine.

recovery does not appear to be genuine.

In addition, the learned counsel for the applicant In addition, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the evidence of P.W.5-Bhupendra Jain who is submitted that the evidence of P.W.5-Bhupendra Jain who is

* 3/4 * 22-APPA-535-2017.doc jeweller shows that the applicant showed him piece of gold jeweller shows that the applicant showed him piece of gold chain. On the next date, he melted the same with the other chain. On the next date, he melted the same with the other gold and prepared a bar. It was submitted that in such gold and prepared a bar. It was submitted that in such case, evidence of P.W.1-Shivani and other witnesses case, evidence of P.W.1-Shivani and other witnesses identifying pieces of gold chain becomes suspicious. identifying pieces of gold chain becomes suspicious. As stated earlier, the only evidence against the As stated earlier, the only evidence against the applicant is the circumstance of recovery of pieces of gold applicant is the circumstance of recovery of pieces of gold chain.

There is no other evidence which connects the chain. There is no other evidence which connects the applicant to the crime. In this view of the matter, we are applicant to the crime.

order:

(I) (I) Applicant be released on bail in the sum of Applicant be released on bail in the sum of Rs.35,000/- with one or two sureties to Rs.35,000/- with one or two sureties to make up the said amount and PR Bond in make up the said amount and PR Bond in the like amount.

the like amount.

(II) (II)During the period while the applicant is on During the period while the applicant is on bail, he shall report to Versova Police bail, he shall report to Versova Police Station once in a month I.e, on the first Station once in a month I.e, on the first Monday of every month.

Monday of every month.

* 4/4 * 22-APPA-535-2017.doc Application is allowed in the above terms.

Application is allowed in the above terms.

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J) (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J)