MHNS010046012020 Order below Exh.1 in Cri. Bail Application No.1685/2020.

{ Rahul @ Gangya Popat Shinde Vs. State }

This is an application under section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code for grant of bail pending trial.

2.Brief facts giving rise to this application can be narrated as follows.

The applicant came to be arrested on 20.11.2020 in Crime No. 373/2020 for the offence punishable under sections 304(2), 143, 147, 149, 323, 326, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Gangapur Police Station, Nashik on the accusation that on 06.11.2020 at 11.30 p.m. in front of Sai Varad Building, Behind Bhosala Military School, Nashik, the accused and co­accused formed unlawful assembly, the common object of which to commit criminal offence and further caused death of Dipak Vasant Jadhav – culpable homicide not amounting to murder and thereby committed an offence.

3.The applicant contends that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Initially offence under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused and co­accused and after death of victim, it is converted into 304 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that during treatment at Civil Hospital, Nashik the victim ran away from the hospital. He was alcoholic. At the time of death also, he was drunken. The injury is not the cause of death. He is behind bar from the date of his arrest.

Investigation is almost completed. Nothing is to be recovered or discovered from him. Therefore, his further detention is not necessary for the purpose of investigation. He is having permanent place of abode and roots in the society. He is ready to furnish the surety to the satisfaction of this Court and also ready to abide by the conditions, if any, imposed by this Court. On these lines, he has prayed for bail pending trial.

4.The respondent State filed its reply and inter­alia denied all the adverse allegations made by the applicant and reiterated prosecution case. There is prima­facie sufficient material on record to show the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the offence. If the accused is released on bail, he may hamper or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. On these lines, respondent State has prayed for rejection of the bail petition.

5.Heard learned advocate Mr. B.R. Chavan appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned A.P.P. Mr. Gaikwad. I have also perused the investigation papers made available by the Investigating Officer. Prima­facie, it seen from the documents that the alleged incident took place on 06.11.2020 at 11.30 p.m. The injured­Dipak Jadhav was taken to Civil Hospital. On the very next day i.e. on 07.11.2020, his statement is recorded, on the basis of which crime came to be registered against the applicant and co­accused under section 326, 324, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. On 10.11.2020, the victim went to his home. The statements of witnesses further show that after returning from hospital, the deceased had gone to the hotel, he had liquor and then omitted there. Therefore, he was brought at home and then he died. I have also gone through the advance cause of death certificate wherein the probable cause of death is mentioned as “cerebral damage due to blunt trauma to head which is sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature”.

6.It further appears from the record that the role attributed to the present applicant is that he manhandled and abused the deceased. The statements of witnesses are also recorded. Considering the sequence of incidents and the role attributed to the applicant, prima­facie, the investigation papers do not show applicant­accused had intention to cause death of victim. The fact remains that the applicant is behind the bar from the date of his arrest. He is ready to co­operate in further investigation and to furnish sufficient surety. He is also ready to abide by the conditions, if any, imposed by this court.

No useful purpose will suffice by keeping him behind bar till filing of the charge­sheet or conclusion of the trial, when he is ready to furnish surety and ready to abide by the conditions. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am of the opinion that the applicant has made out case for grant of bail on certain terms and conditions. With this, I proceed to pass the following order.

O R D E R

1 Application is hereby allowed.

2 Applicant­ Rahul @ Gangya Popat Shinde be enlarged on bail, in Crime No.373/2020 for the offence punishable under sections 304(2), 143, 147, 149, 323, 326, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Gangapur Police Station, Nashik, on furnishing personal bond of Rs.20,000/­ with one or two sureties in like amount.

3 He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as dissuade them for disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

4 He shall not commit similar or any other offence and misuse the liberty granted by this Court.

5 He shall attend the concerned police station on every Monday in between 10 a.m. to 01 p.m. till filing of the charge­sheet and cooperate in further investigation.

6 He shall furnish his address proof, identification proof and mobile number, if any, and shall not change his residential address without informing Investigating Officer.

Seema Digitally signed by Seema Chandrakant Chandrakant Jadhav Date: 2020.12.05 15:55:07 Jadhav
+0530 ( Smt. S.C. Jadhav ) 05th December, 2020. Additional Sessions Judge­8, Nashik. Document Outline