Annadurai Ganapati Devendra v. State Of Maharashtra
1 of 5 22.BA.1763.2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1763 OF 2025 Annadurai Ganapati Devendra, Chembur, Mumbai (presently in Aurther Road Jail) Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent ATUL GANESH KULKARNI Mr.Afreen Shaikh with Adv.Nikhat Shaikh for Applicant. Mrs.Shilpa G.Talhar, APP, for State.
Mr.Mahendra Shinde, P.I., RCF Police Station, present. ATUL GANESH KULKARNI Date: 2025.07.03 19:50:58 +0530 CORAM :
AMIT BORKAR J.
DATE :
3rd July 2025 PC :
1.
This is a bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, whereby the applicant seeks regular bail in connection with Crime No.318 of 2024 registered at RCF Police Station, Mumbai. The applicant has been arrested for offences punishable under Sections 302 (murder), 452 (house trespass), 141, 143, 147, 149 (unlawful assembly), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult), 506(2) (criminal intimidation), 120B (criminal conspiracy), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.
2.
The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11th May 2024 at around 1:11 a.m., the informant received a phone call from his maternal aunt (Mami), Smt. Shila, informing him that
2 of 5 22.BA.1763.2025.doc some persons were banging on the door of his maternal uncle's (Mama's) house using their feet. The informant then called his cousin brother to verify the situation. After some time, the cousin informed him that accused No.1, along with two other persons, was seen banging the door and threatening his Mama. Later, around 6:00 to 6:30 a.m., the informant's son came running and told him that someone was fighting with Pitamber Mama near the railway tracks. The informant rushed to the spot and allegedly saw the accused persons involved in a scuffle with his Mama. He intervened and tried to rescue his Mama. Thereafter, they somehow managed to reach their residence. However, the accused persons allegedly followed them. Accused No.1 is stated to have caught hold of the victim's collar and began hitting him.
The other co-accused also allegedly assaulted the victim. It is specifically alleged that Accused No.1 gave fist blows to the head of the victim, causing him to fall unconscious. After the assault, all the accused persons fled from the spot. The informant, along with others, took his Mama to the hospital, where he was declared dead. Based on this incident, the present FIR came to be lodged at RCF Police Station.
3.
Learned Advocate for the applicant has drawn attention to the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench in Bail Application No.5123 of 2018, wherein the co-accused, having a similar role in the incident, was released on bail. It is further submitted that the alleged incident, as described by the prosecution, does not involve the use of any deadly weapon. The specific role attributed to the present applicant is that of giving fist blows,
3 of 5 22.BA.1763.2025.doc and there is no specific overt act of using any weapon or any singularly fatal blow attributed to him. The learned advocate also pointed out that the final medical opinion regarding cause of death is still awaited. Hence, she submits that the applicant be granted bail, more particularly when the investigation is complete and the applicant is in custody for a considerable time. 4.
On the other hand, learned APP for the State opposed the application and submitted that the applicant, along with coaccused, formed an unlawful assembly and shared the common intention to commit the murder of the deceased. It is argued that Section 300 IPC is attracted, as the actions of the accused persons, including the applicant, show that they intended to cause such bodily injury which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. She therefore submits that the application may be rejected.
5.
I have carefully perused the material on record, including the FIR, statements of witnesses, and the post-mortem report placed on record. On a prima facie consideration, it is seen that although the allegation against the applicant is of physical assault, the nature of the assault is by means of fists and blows. No weapon is stated to have been used by the applicant. The role of the applicant appears to be similar to that of the coaccused who has already been granted bail. The prosecution has not placed on record any material to show that the present applicant was carrying any weapon or delivered any fatal blow independently. The cause of death as recorded in the post-
4 of 5 22.BA.1763.2025.doc mortem is still not conclusively linked to the blows attributed to the present applicant alone.
6.
It is well settled that bail is the rule and jail is an exception. The object of bail is to ensure the presence of the accused at the time of trial. There is no material to show that the applicant is a flight risk or likely to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. The investigation appears to be complete and the charge-sheet is already filed. The role attributed is not distinguishable from that of co-accused released on bail. 7.
Having regard to the totality of the circumstances, nature of allegations, and the period of incarceration already undergone, and considering the principle of parity, I am of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be released on bail, subject to stringent conditions.
8.
Hence, I pass following order :
ORDER
(i) Bail Application is allowed and disposed off; (ii) It is directed that the Applicant shall be released on bail in Crime Crime No.318 of 2024 registered with RCF Police Station, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 452, 141, 143, 147, 149, 323, 504, 506(2), 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code, on furnishing P.R.Bond of Rupees Twenty Five Thousands with one or two solvent surety in the like amount;
(iii) The Applicant shall report to the Investigating
5 of 5 22.BA.1763.2025.doc Officer of RCF Police Station initially for the first two months on the third Saturday of the month between 11.00 a.m to 12.00 p.m and thereafter as and when called; (iv) The Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and attend the Trial Court on all dates unless specifically exempted and will not take any unnecessary adjournments. If he does so, it will entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of this order;
(v) The Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court. He shall deposit his passport, if any, within two weeks after being released on bail with the Trial Court; (vi) The Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (vii) The Applicant shall kep the Investigating Officer informed of his current address and mobile contact number and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time;
(viii) Any infraction of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of this order.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.) MST