Arjun Suresh Piwal v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3470 OF 2021 Arjun Suresh Piwal ...
Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...
Respondent Mr. S. T. Pandey a/w Mr. Arvin Singh a/w Ashif Hussain a/w Deepika Oswal a/w J. M. Patel a/w Ramsha Khatib a/w Bharati Bhosale i/b SBG Law, for the Applicant.
Mr. Ameet A. Palkar, APP, for the State-Respondent. CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J.
RESERVED ON : 29th November, 2021.
PRONOUNCED ON : 14th December, 2021.
PC:- .
The present application has been moved by the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in C.R. No.451 of 2020 registered with Upnagar Police Station, Nashik District-Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120-B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3, 25 of the Arms Act. The prosecution case in short is that on 19/09/2020 informant' s nephew, namely, Nawaj @ Baba Shaikh (deceased) informed him on his Rekha Patil 1/5
mobile at about 09.53 p.m. that he has been shot by Tipya and Murgi Raja and further requested to come immediately. The informant then informed his brother-in-law, namely, Jahid Shaikh about the said incident. Informant along with his friend Wasim Anwar Shaikh then rushed to the spot. By the time informant's brother-in-law i.e. Jahid Shaikh and sister Jakiya had already reached there. The police had also reached. The deceased was rushed to the hospital and on way to the hospital, the deceased informed that he was summoned by Tipya at Regimental Plaza with a view to settle earlier dispute and, therefore, he accordingly went there. Accused Murgi Raja and his companion Arjun Piwal (applicant) were also there. It is then accused Murgi Raja shot at him. It then appears that during the course of treatment the deceased succumbed to the gun injury. The informant accordingly lodged the report.
Mr.Pandey, learned Counsel for the applicant, submits that there is no evidence to show that the present applicant was present at the time of incident. Moreover, statements of witnesses are inconsistent with each other. As far as the role of the present applicant is concerned, there being no cogent and convincing evidence, the applicant is falsely implicated. In view of the material on record, the applicant deserves to Rekha Patil 2/5
be enlarged on bail, urged learned Counsel.
Mr. Palkar, learned APP, on the other hand, submits that the statement of witnesses clearly suggests the involvement of the applicant in the offence. Having regard to the seriousness of the offence, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail, argued learned APP. Perused investigation papers and the statements of prosecution witnesses. The first statement which I would like to refer is that of Wasim Anwar Shaikh, who had accompanied the informant at the place of occurrence. It is his statement that while they were taking the deceased to the hospital, the deceased told that he was shot on his back by Tipu and Murgi Raja. There were two more persons with them. His statement is inconsistent with the contents of FIR. In the FIR, the prosecution alleges that the deceased was shot at by Murgi Raja. What is pertinent to note is that although FIR shows the presence of applicant at the time of incident but this witness nowhere says that the applicant was also present.
Next statements are that of Jakiya Jahid Shaikh and Jahid Ismail Shaikh, who are sister and brother-in-law respectively of the informant. Rekha Patil 3/5
Both of them state that the deceased had told them that he was beaten by Tipu and Murgi Raja and the applicant. These statements are in direct conflict with not only the contents of FIR but also are in conflict with the statement of Wasim Shaikh to the extent that these two witnesses implicate the applicant also. Thus there is material and serious inconsistency between the statements of sister and brother-inlaw of the informant on the one hand and the contents of FIR and the statement of Wasim Shaikh on the other.
Having regard to the material on record and in the light of serious discrepancy, as noted herein-above, the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the following order.
ORDER
(i) Applicant- Arjun Suresh Piwal shall be released on bail in C.R. No.451 of 2020 registered with Upnagar Police Station, Nashik DistrictNashik on his executing P .R. bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one or more sureties in like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall attend the trial regularly.
(iii) The observations made herein-above are prima-facie in its nature Rekha Patil 4/5
for the purpose of deciding the bail application only. The trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations while deciding the case on merits.
(iv) Bail before the trial Court.
(v) The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and stands disposed of accordingly.
REKHA PRAKASH PATIL (V. G. BISHT, J.) REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2021.12.14 14:15:28 +0530 Rekha Patil 5/5