Nihal S/O Kailash Zade (In Jail) v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. P.S.O. P.S. Chandrapur (City), Chandrapur

1 1509ba767.16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 767 OF 2016 (Nihal Kailash Zade Vs. The State of Maharashtra) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri R. M. Daga, Advocate for the applicant.

Shri T. A. Mirza, A.P.P. for the State.

CORAM : S. B. SHUKRE, J.

DATED : SEPEMBER 15, 2016 Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

This applicant and the co-accused are facing prosecution for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 324, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. This applicant had been arrested on 31/5/2014. The trial is yet to commence. There is allegation specifically made against this applicant to the effect that in the quarrel, which took place in between Naved and Wasim on the one hand and this applicant and Sarang on the other, this applicant took out the knife and gave its blow to the deceased Naved. It is not in dispute that this is a case wherein only single blow of knife is given. The facts and circumstances of the case show that, so far as this applicant is concerned, he was not present at the spot since inception and he was also not involved in calling Naved and Wasim to the spot, but, rather they were called apparently by another

2 1509ba767.16 person. Then, there was also some sort of scuffle between Naved and Wasim on the one hand and this applicant and co-accused on the other before the knife blow was actually given. The postmortem report reserved the opinion regarding probable cause of death. The opinion has been reserved since 20/5/2014. It is stated by learned Counsel for the applicant that there is still no change in the situation and the opinion continues to remain in reserved state. The trial has not yet commenced. With such nature of evidence and uncertainty in the matter, it would be unfair to keep this applicant in jail for indefinite period of time. In fact, in the situation, a pro-active role was to be put forth by the trial Court so that the interest of the prosecution as well as rights of the accused are well served and protected.

Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances of this case, this applicant deserves to be granted bail. Hence, the order. The application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a P. R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- together with one solvent surety in the like amount on the conditions that the applicant shall attend the Court proceedings on the dates fixed in the matter, shall cooperate with the Court in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

JUDGE wwl

3 1509ba767.16 CERTIFICATE "I certify that this order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed order."

Uploaded by : W. W. Lichade Uploaded on : 16/9/2016