..1..
MHNS010021892022
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 547 OF 2022
Kailas Dagadu Barve
Age 52 Yrs., Occ: Agri.
R/o. 526, Barabhighe mala,
Kadwapar, Vinchur Dalvi,
Tal. Sinnar, Dist. Nashik.

… Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra
Police Inspector,
Sinnar Police Station,
Sinnar Dist. Nashik.

… Opponent
ORDER ON EXH.1
1.

The applicant has filed this application for bail under
Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in crime No.115/2022 of Sinnar Police station for
the offence punishable under Section 302, 147, 148, 149 and 452 of
I.P.C.
2.

The case of the prosecution is that, on 28/02/2022 when
the informant had been to Nashik Court alongwith her husband in
connection with her work, she received phone call of her son Shailesh
who informed her that the present applicant alongwith other 13 to 14
peoples have forcefully entered in their house and are assaulting him.
So at about 2.00 to 3.00 p.m. when they were proceeding towards their
house they saw that their son Shailesh was crying on the road and after
removing his clothes they saw that he had burn injuries on his back. He
narrated that the present applicant and 13 to 14 other persons have
assaulted him by stick, kick and fist blows, whereas the present
applicant has thrown petrol on his body and has set him on fire. Also
..2..
another accused Suman Pawar has twisted his private part. Thereafter
they took Shailesh to Hospital and during his treatment he succumbed
to his injuries on 01/03/2022. Hence, the report.
3.

The applicant has filed application seeking bail on the
ground that he is falsely implicated in the offence. There is delay of
near about 25 days in lodging the report and so same itself to sufficient
to show that he is falsely involved in the offence due to the long
standing disputes between them. The report is lodged only on the basis
of hearsay information allegedly given by the deceased. There is no
discovery or recovery at the hands of applicant. So it is prayed that he
be released on bail.
4.

The Ld. APP. has filed pursis vide Exh.4 and the
Investigation Officer has filed his say vide Exh.5 and has contested this
application stating that the offence is serious in nature. It is contended
that from the report it can be seen that there is direct involvement of
this applicant in the crime. Investigation is in progress. Also there is
likelihood that if applicant is released on bail, he might tamper with the
witnesses. So it is prayed that the application be rejected.
5.

Heard Ld. Adv. Kurkute for accused. He argued that there
is long standing dispute between the applicant and the informant’s
family. On the relevant day the applicant had been to obtain the
possession of the land as per the order of the court with the help of
Tasildar, Talathi and other Revenue Officer but the deceased has
obstructed them in their work. So they return back. Whereas lateron, he
is falsely implicated in this offence. It is also argued that it is not at all
possible that the applicant might have assaulted the victim in presence
of aforestated Revenue Officers. Also there is dealy of 25 days in
lodging the report and same is sufficient to show that applicant is
..3..
falsely implicated in this case due to previous grudge. The applicant is
not having any criminal antecedents. Per contra, the informant as well
as the victim are having criminal antecedents. There is no recovery of
discovery at the hands of present applicant. So he argued that
application be allowed.
6.

The Ld. APP Smt. Patil on the other hand argued that the
contention in the FIR shows direct involvement of the present applicant
in the offence. It is alleged that he has thrown petrol on the victim on
his backside of the body and set him on fire. The post mortem report
shows the death of victim due to the said burn injuries. The
investigation is in progress. Hence, considering the gravity of the
offence and as the punishment prescribed for the same is death
sentence or life imprisonment, she argued that application be rejected.
7.

Considered the arguments. Gone through the FIR. The FIR
is lodged by the mother of the victim. In this FIR she has alleged that on
relevant day when she was in Nashik Court for some court work she has
received phone of his son Shailesh who has narrated her that the
present applicant and 13 to 14 other persons are assaulting him. So
when he had been towards their house on the road she saw her son
Shailesh who was crying on the road and he removed his clothes and
has shown burn injuries on his back and other parts of body. He
narrated that the present applicant has thrown petrol on his body from
backside and has set him on fire. So he has wrapped wet blanket
around him and has ran inside the house. Lateron, during treatment he
succumbed to his injuries on 01/03/2022.
8.

In view of the contentions in the FIR as aforestated it can
be seen that prima facie there is direct evidence against the present
applicant to show his involvement in the crime. So at this stage there is
..4..
prima facie sufficient material to say that the present applicant has
thrown petrol on the victim and set him on fire. In this context, it is
brought on record by the I.O. during argument that the certificate of
cause of death shows that the death of victim Shailesh is caused due to
burns. The APP also argued that the PM also shows that the victim had
severe burn injuries on his back and legs and his death is caused
because of the said injuries. Hence, at this stage there is sufficient
material to infer that the applicant is involved in the crime.
9.

The applicant has sought bail on the ground that he is
falsely involved and the same can be seen from the delay in lodging the
FIR. Considered the contention. The record shows that the alleged
incident has occurred on 28/02/2022 and report is lodged on
25/03/2022. So there is delay of near about 25 days in lodging report
as contended by the applicant. However, at this initial state only due to
the long standing disputes between the parties, it cannot be concluded
and said that the applicant is falsely involved and hence the delay. Per
contra, in the FIR it is stated that informant being the mother of the
victim was devastated due to the death of her son. Also her husband
was in state of mental shock. So prima facie at this stage, considering
this contentions in the report, it cannot be said that the delay is vital
and because of the same applicant is entitled for bail. Whereas, during
the trial the said fact can be considered.
10.

In the FIR there is direct evidence against the applicant. So
prima facie at this stage, there is enough evidence which connects the
applicant with the present crime. There is prima facie sufficient material
on record to show the involvement of the applicant in this offence. So
considering the same and as the offence is serious in nature as
punishment prescribed for the same is death sentence or life
..5..
imprisonment, so it will not be justified to release the applicant on bail.
Moreover considering the previous longstanding dispute between the
parties, the apprehension of prosecution regarding pressurizing of the
witnesses cannot be ruled out. The investigation is also at initial stage.
So for the aforestated reason I proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
Application for bail is rejected.
RADHIKA
MADHUKAR
SHINDE
Date:­ 01/06/2022
Nashik.

Digitally signed
by RADHIKA
MADHUKAR
SHINDE
Date:
2022.06.02
17:27:39 +0530
(Smt. R.M. Shinde)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Nashik.