Dattatraya Bhimrao Talekar v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1545 OF 2023 DATTATRAYA BHIMRAO TALEKAR ..APPLICANT VS.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT ------------ Adv. Dinesh W. Bhosale for the Applicant.

Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the State.

------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

DATE : AUGUST 21, 2023.

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.

2.

This is an application for bail in respect of the offence punishable under Sections 302, 504, 141, 143, 147, 148 of the Indian Penal Code (hereafter 'IPC' for short) read with Sections 4, 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered vide First Information Report (FIR) No.337/2022 with Karmala Police Station, Solapur Rural.

3.

There are in all five accused. The applicant is the accused no. 3. The date of the incident is 27/4/2022. The FIR is registered on the same day. The applicant was arrested 1/5

on 28/4/2022..

4.

My attention is invited to the order dated 28/3/2023 passed by this Court while releasing the accused no.2 and accused no.4 on bail. The order dated 28/3/2023 reads thus:- "2. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the aforesaid Applicants, who is facing trial in Sessions Case No. 184 of 2022 pending before the Sessions Court. The said case arises from C.R. No. 337 of 2022 registered with Karmala Police Station, Solapur, for offences under Section 141, 143, 147, 148, 302 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicants and learned APP for the State. I have perused the records and considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsels for the respective parties

4. The aforesaid crime was registered pursuant to the FIR lodged by Sudhir Arjun Talekar. A perusal of the FIR reveals that on 27th April, 2022 there was an altercation between the co-accused Bhimrao Talekar and Amol, son of the Complainant over damage caused to a wooden plank. The family members of the Applicant came to the place of incident. It is alleged that Bhimrao Talekar threw Amol on the ground and sat on his chest, Mangal Talekar caught hold of his hands. In the meantime, Amol Dattatraya Talekar went to his house and came with a knife and inflicted injury on Amol.

2/5

5. The material on record prima facie indicates that the fatal injury was inflicted by the co-accused Amol Dattatraya Talekar. The only role attributed to the Applicant No.1 is that she had held the hands of the deceased even before the co-accused Amol Talekar had gone to his house to bring the weapon. There is no prima facie material on record to indicate that she had knowledge that the co- accused Amol Talekar would come with a sharp weapon and inflict injuries on the deceased Amol. So far as Applicant No.2 is concerned, no specific role is attributed to her. Considering the nature of accusation against these two Applicants, in my considered view, this would be a fit case to exercise discretion under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. Moreover, it is stated that the charge is not yet framed. Considering the large pendency of cases, the trial is not likely to commence in the immediate future. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the Application is allowed on the following terms and conditions."

5.

Learned APP opposed the application contending that so far as accused no.2 and 4 who were granted bail, are concerned, they are women.

6.

So far as accused no.4 is concerned, there is no role attributed to her.

7.

I have carefully perused the order dated 28/3/2023. The accused no.2 is assigned the specific role of holding the hand of the deceased has been granted bail and not on the 3/5

consideration that she is a woman. Moreover, this Court expressed that considering the large pendency of cases, the trial is not likely to commence in the immediate future. 8.

The role assigned to the present applicant is that he held legs of the deceased. In my opinion, this is a case where the allegations against the applicant are similar to the one levelled against the accused no.2 who has been released on bail. The investigation is complete. The chargesheet has been filed. This Court has already recorded in the case of the co-accused that the trial is not likely to commence in the immediate future. I am inclined to release the applicant on bail by imposing stringent conditions. Hence the following order.

O R D E R

(a) The application is allowed.

(b) The applicant- Dattatraya Bhimrao in connection with FIR No. 337/2022 with Karmala Police Station, Solapur Rural, shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.

(c) The applicant shall report to the Investigating 4/5

Officer of the concerned police station once every first Monday of the month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. subject to any modification of the condition by the trial Court after framing of the charge.

(d) The applicant shall not reside within the jurisdiction of Karmala Police Station for a period of six months from today and shall not enter the jurisdiction except for the purpose of reporting.

(e) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer. The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (f) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.

9.

The application is disposed of.

(M. S. KARNIK, J.) 5/5 Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 21/08/2023 19:04:28