Anand @ Balu Sadashiv Kanade v. The State Of Maharashtra

vks

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2162 OF 2015 Anand @ Balu Sadashiv .... Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. S.V. Kotwal, for the Applicant.

Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM : A. M. BADAR, J.

DATE : 22nd JUNE, 2016.

P.C. :

1.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.

2.

He argued that the statements of alleged eye witnesses was firstly recorded on 19.5.2014; wherein he had not implicated the present applicant as accused. However, subsequently on 26.5.2014, said eye witness stated that the present applicant had assaulted the deceased. The leaned counsel further argued that this eye witness is no more and as such the statement recorded under Section 161 of Code of Criminal Procedure is now of no use. According to learned counsel except alleged recovery, there is no evidence against the present applicant. 3.

As against this the learned APP has stated that the trial has 1/3

already begun and no bail should be granted.

4.

Perusal of the F.I.R. goes to show that the daughter of deceased Balasaheb Wabale married present applicant against wishes of her parents. According to prosecution case, applicant belongs to chambhar caste and as such parents of his wife were against the marriage. This has resulted in assaulting present applicant on previous occasion by Balasaheb Wable (since deceased). This incident has resulted in registration of separate crime against the parents of wife of present applicant and that criminal case appears to be subjudiced. 5.

The informant is brother of deceased Balasaheb Wagable. The postmortem report shows that the death of Balasaheb is homicidal. The informant had apprehended that Balasaheb must have murdered by the applicant because of previous enmity 6.

At the time of incident, according to prosecution case, Balasaheb was riding motorcycle. Somnath Jaysing Chavan, was pillion rider. After arrest of the present applicant on 23.5.2014, supplementary statement of this witness was recorded wherein he has stated that present applicant alongwith co-accused had assaulted Balasaheb by means of Koyata. Somnath has stated the reason of not disclosing the truth of incident to police on earlier occasion. This Somnath is reported to be dead. At the instance of present applicant, two koyta as well as 2/3

clothes worn by him were recovered.

7.

The learned counsel for the applicant states that the Chemical Analyzer's report is not yet filed with the chargesheet. It appears that same is awaited. As such it cannot be said that there is no evidence against the present applicant. As the trial has already begun, considering the evidence of recovery against applicant, applicant cannot be released on bail. The application is, therefore, rejected.

[A. M. BADAR, J.] 3/3