Shivanand @ Shivaji Fakirappa Adakar v. State Of Maharashtra

3.APPA964_2016.doc Vidya Amin

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 964 OF 2016 (For Bail) IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST.) NO. 550 OF 2016 Shivanand @ Shivaji Fakirappa Adakar ...

Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra ...

Respondent Mr. Sandeep V. Ghaste, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. H.J. Dedia, APP for the Respondent - State CORAM: SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.

DATE: AUGUST 25, 2016 P.C.:

This Application for bail is moved by the applicant. The applicant is convicted for the offences punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for life by the judgment and order dated 13th December, 2015 in Sessions Case No. 83 of 2013 passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge-1, Kolhapur.

2.

The learned counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that the accused was not the husband of the deceased on which the case of the prosecution is based. He submitted that the daughter is of the deceased and not of the accused. He further submitted that PW-1 Nanaso Kadam and PW-2 Bhagwan Sutar are not the residents of the said vicinity and 1 / 2

3.APPA964_2016.doc there were many contradictions and discrepancies in their evidence. He submitted that there is no eye witness in this case. The case is based on poor circumstantial evidence and hence the applicant is to be bailed out. The learned counsel has also argued that the case does not fall under the last seen together theory, which is erroneously considered by the trial Court.

3.

Learned APP opposed this Application.

4.

Perused the evidence of PW-1 Nanaso Kadam, PW-2 Bhagawan Sutar, medical evidence and the evidence of police officer PW-8 Dilip Patil. On 11th March, 2012 there were quarrel between the accused and deceased. There is evidence that the body of deceased was lying inside the house where the accused and deceased were residing as husband and wife. It was locked from outside by the accused and the lock was opened by the police. As per the medical report, the deceased died due to head injury. The axe was lying near the body. Considering the evidence of the witnesses, we are of this view that this is not a fit case to grant bail. Hence the Application for bail is rejected.

(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.) 2 / 2