Vishawamber Malhari Tiknare v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

-:(1):- FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Court's or Judge's orders.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.: 622 OF 2015 VISHAWAMBER MALHARI TIKNARE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. R. R. Mantri, Advocate h/f Mr. Sancheti Rahul R.

APP for Respondents: Mr. R. P. Phatke.

*** CORAM: T. V. NALAWADE, J.

DATED: 23rd FEBRUARY, 2015.

PER COURT:

1.

This application is filed for bail. Both the sides are heard. This Court has perused the papers of investigation. 2.

The crime is registered on the basis of report given by Hanumant Deokate. The deceased Maroti was his brother. On 6th August, 2014 after 08.30 a.m. when he was proceeding towards the field he noticed that present applicant and other 5 accused persons had picked up quarrel

-:(2):- with his deceased brother. During quarrel, present applicant gave a blow of spear from pointed side on the abdomen of the deceased. Allegations are made that other accused Pliraji and Digamber were holding deceased at the relevant time and lady accused was instigating the others. Other persons also rushed to the spot.

3.

The p.m. report shows that due to the incised wound the intestine had come out and there was injury to the intestine. The death took place due to haemorrhagic shock due to blood loss from abdominal wound. The material collected against the applicant is sufficient to make out a strong prima facie case of murder. Considering the record, there is possibility of applicant tampering the prosecution witnesses. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that applicant in Criminal Application No.330 of 2015 is granted bail (to Digambar and Pandurang). This Court has discussed the role attributed to Digambar and Pandurang and in view of the material available against them, this Court has granted bail to them.

4.

In the result, the application is rejected.

5.

Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that direction needs to be given to expedite the matter. The

-:(3):- applicant has been behind bars since 6th August, 2014. The trial Court is expected to expedite the case within 6 months from date of this order. There will be liberty to the applicant to approach this Court after 6 months.

[T. V. NALAWADE, J.] Dt.23/02/2015 ans/622