Anand Mallikarjun Waghmare v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1036 OF 2017 Anand Mallikarjun Waghmare ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Samir Kumbhakoni for the Applicant Mr. S. H. Yadav, A.P.P for the Respondent-State CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

THURSDAY, 4 th MAY, 2017 P.C. :

1.

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

2.

By this application, the applicant seeks his enlargement on bail in connection with C.R. No. 108 of 2016 registered with the Salgar Vasti Police Station, Solapur, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Learned Counsel for the applicant seeks bail on the ground of parity. He submitted that co-accused-Laxmi @ Laxmibai Mallikarjun Waghmare has been enlarged on bail by this Court (Coram: Mrs. Mridula 1/5

Bhatkar, J.) vide order dated 15th March, 2017 passed in Criminal Bail Application No.2294 of 2016 and co-accused-Santosh Mallikarjun Waghmare has been enlarged on bail by this Court (Coram: Revati Mohite Dere, J.) vide order dated 19th April, 2017 passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 822 of 2017. He submits that the allegations against the applicant are similar to that of co-accused - Laxmi @ Laxmibai and Santosh. He further submitted that there is no evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged offence.

4.

Learned A.P.P opposed the bail application. He submitted that the statement of Jagdevi S. Gaikwad, neighbour of the applicant shows that the applicant and co-accused Santosh were in the house, when Laxmi @Laxmibai ran in the house on 18th June, 2015 at about 6:00 a.m. 5.

Perused the papers. Deceased-Shobha was the sister of the applicant. She was residing in the house alongwith the applicant (brother of the deceased), her mother-Laxmi @ Laxmibai (co-accused), father and another brother-Anand. Deceased-Shobha was about 24 years of age at the relevant time. The incident in question has taken place on the intervening 2/5

night of 17th and 18th June, 2016. According to the prosecution, Shobha was found unconscious in the house at about 6.00 a.m. and as Shobha was not breathing, the applicant and others tried to revive her, called for a rickshaw and took her to the hospital, where she was pronounced dead. The postmortem report indicates that deceased-Shobha died an unnatural death, pursuant to which the aforesaid complaint was lodged, as against the applicant (brother of the deceased), Laxmi @ Laxmibai (mother of the deceased) and Anand (another brother of the deceased), as they were present in the house at the time of the incident. No doubt, the deceased died unnatural death and it appears that all the accused were present in the house at the relevant time, however, the learned A.P.

P is unable to point out any material on record to show, that the applicant or any of the accused had any motive to cause Shobha's death. Prima facie, there is nothing on record to show that the applicant committed the alleged offence. Even otherwise, co-accused-Laxmi @ Laxmibai and Santosh, have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 15th March, 2017 and 21st April, 2017 respectively. Investigation is complete and charge-sheet is filed. 6.

Considering the aforesaid, the application is allowed and the 3/5

applicant is enlarged on bail on the following terms and conditions:

ORDER

i) The applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station, on the first Monday of every month, between 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m., till the conclusion of the trial;

iii) The applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and mobile contact number and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the trial Court as well as to the concerned Police Station, in writing;

iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case; v) The applicant shall cooperate with the conduct of the trial. 4/5

7.

The Application is allowed and disposed of in above terms. 8.

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie and are confined to this application and the learned Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein. 9.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

5/5