Cri.B.A.No.1675/2020 Criminal Bail Application No.1675/2020 CNR No. MHNS010045682020
[Minanath Punjaji Shinde etc.1 V s. State]
Order below Exh.1.
The applicants have preferred this application for anticipatory bail praying therein that they may be released on bail in the event of arrest Cr.No.I758/2020 of Sinnar P. S., for offences punishable under Sections 306, 323, 504, 506, 507 r.w. 34 of I.P.C., on the basis of FIR lodged by Sudarshan Dinkar Shelke contending therein that the accused persons on the account of business of cabbage, abused, threatened and abetted for the commission of suicide to father of the informant.
2.Bail application is filed on the ground that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. That Dinkar had taken cabbage from the applicants who are farmers. The cheque issued towards consideration amount was dishonoured. The applicants were demanding the amount, he committed suicide. That coaccused Nitin Pandurang Avhad has been released on anticipatory bail. False FIR is lodged against applicants.
Investigation is almost completed. That they will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will abide by terms and conditions if any imposed by the Court. On these main grounds and others have prayed for bail.
3.Notice was issued to State. State appeared through Ld. APP Smt.Sangle and filed say resisting for grant of application on the grounds that deceased committed suicide due to harassment
given by the accused. In the chit written by deceased, there is clearly mentioned that due to harassment given by accused, he has committed suicide. Motorcycle of the deceased is to be recovered from accused Minanath. The offence is serious one hence inquiry is to be done with accused. On these main grounds and others have prayed for rejection of bail application.
4.Heard Ld. Advocate Mr.V.S.Deshmukh for applicant.
Perused bail application. Heard Ld. APP Smt.Sangle. Perused police papers and say filed by Sinnar police station.
5.On perusal of FIR, it can be gathered that there was commercial transaction between Dinkar on one hand and Nitin Avhad, Minanath Shinde and other farmers on the other. It can also be gathered that Dinkar was supposed to pay the dues which he owed towards the farmers as he had taken cabbage from them and supplied them to Shaki Sayyad. The FIR further reveals that Shakil Sayyad used to deposit the amount which he received from the traders in the account of Dinkar and accordingly, Dinkar used to distribute it to the farmers which was not done and therefore, the farmers i.e. the accused were aggrieved and demanding their dues from Dinkar.
6.On perusal of suicide note, the names of applicants appearing thereon. It is specifically mentioned that both of them came to his house, assaulted him and took his vehicle. Even in the FIR, it is mentioned that Minanath Shinde, Ashok Shinde and Nitin Avhad had supplied cabbage and as the amount was not given,Minanath Shinde used to come to their house, abused him in filthy language, had assaulted his father and taken away the motorcycle No.MH15EW6891. It was argued by Ld. Advocate that the RTO record does not disclose the name of Dinkar Shelke or his son as owner in the RTO record. He has placed on record the extract from RTO with respect to motorcycle No.MH15EW 6891 which states the owner as Shirsath Sachin Pandit. It needs to be taken into consideration that in criminal matters, the ownership need not be taken into consideration. Forcefully taking anything from the possession will be an offence. In the instance case, the motorcycle was taken forcefully from Dinkar by Minanath. This will have impact upon the mind of Dinkar resulting in his suicide.
7.As far as parity is concerned, there was memorandum of understanding entered into between Dinkar and Nitin at the police station itself when Nitin had given complaint against Dinkar. There were no allegations against Nitin that something was to be recovered at his instance. However, the suicide note as well as FIR specifically mentions about motorcycle used by Dinkar [deceased] being taken away forcefully by Minanath and this motorcycle is to be recovered at the instance of Minanath. Hence, parity can not be considered as far as Minanath is concerned whereas the same can be extended to Ashok.
8.At this stage, whether they had mens rea or not can not be considered. Thus, from the above said discussion, it will be proper to exercise discretion of anticipatory bail in favour of the applicant No.2 Ashok Shinde. Hence, I proceed to pass following order :
ORDER
(1). Application is partly allowed.
(2) The application of Minanath Punjaji Shinde is rejected.
(3) In the event of arrest, the applicant No.2 Ashok Namdeo Shinde in connection with Cr.No.I758/2020 of Sinnar P. S., for offences punishable under Sections 306, 323, 504, 506, 507 r.w. 34 of I.P.C., on the basis of FIR lodged by Sudarshan Dinkar Shelke, the above named applicant be released on bail, on furnishing a PR and SB of Rs. 15,000/ ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with one surety of like amount on following conditions.
(a). Ashok Namdeo Shinde shall attend concern Police Station on every Monday between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet.
(b). Ashok Namdeo Shinde 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
(c). Violation of any of the above mentioned condition, would result in cancellation of bail.
(3).Inform concerned police station accordingly.
Digitally signed by Vardhan Vardhan Prataprao Prataprao Desai Desai Date: 2021.01.21 16:37:24 +0530
Nashik. ( V. P. Desai) Date : 21/01/2021 Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik.