Mumbai, January 29, 2022 – Amol Anil Gudekar, accused in a murder case, has been granted bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai. Additional Sessions Judge G.B. Gurao allowed Gudekar’s bail application (Criminal Bail Application No. 100 of 2022), citing significant delays in witness statements and the lack of direct evidence implicating Gudekar in the initial FIR.
Gudekar was arrested in connection with Crime Register No. 591/2021, registered at R.C.F. Police Station, for offenses punishable under sections 302 (murder), 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach1 of the peace), 143 (unlawful assembly), 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), and 149 (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed2 in prosecution of common object)3 read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Prosecution’s Case:
The case stemmed from a complaint filed by Kabir Shaikh on October 7, 2021. He alleged that his brother, Hanif, was assaulted on October 4, 2021, by Vijendra Khade, Sumeet Malusare, Swapnil Khapre, and Jayesh Shelar, following a dispute over drinking liquor. Hanif later succumbed to his injuries on October 9, 2021, leading to the addition of murder charges.
Defense Arguments:
Gudekar’s advocate, Amrish Salunke, argued that his client was innocent and not present at the scene of the crime. He pointed out that Gudekar’s name was not mentioned in the initial FIR and that there was no recovery or discovery of evidence linked to him. Salunke highlighted the delayed statements of key witnesses, Imran and Ashraf, which were recorded on October 10 and October 26, respectively, despite Imran having informed the complainant about the incident on the day it occurred. He also emphasized that Gudekar had no prior criminal record and was ready to comply with any bail conditions.
Prosecution’s Objections:
The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Ramesh Siroya, opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offense and the fact that co-accused Vijendra and Sumeet were absconding. They argued that Gudekar might also abscond if released on bail.
Court’s Decision:
Judge Gurao, after reviewing the charge sheet, noted the significant delays in recording the statements of Imran and Ashraf. He observed that Imran, who initially informed the complainant about the incident, did not mention Gudekar’s involvement until his statement was recorded on October 10. Similarly, Ashraf’s statement, which implicated Gudekar, was recorded on October 26, several weeks after the incident.
The court also considered a cross-complaint filed by co-accused Sumeet, which mentioned a dispute involving the deceased and others, but did not implicate Gudekar. The judge highlighted that Gudekar was arrested during the investigation, but no incriminating evidence was recovered from him.
Conditions of Bail:
Judge Gurao granted Gudekar bail on the following conditions:
- He must execute a personal bond (PR Bond) of ₹30,000 with one or more sureties of the same amount.
- He must attend the concerned police station as and when required by the investigating officer.
- He must not pressurize prosecution witnesses.
- He must not commit any offense while on bail.
- He must provide his correct address to the investigating officer.
- He was granted provisional cash bail of 30,000 rupees for four weeks.
- Bail must be executed before the Learned Magistrate.
The court concluded that Gudekar was entitled to bail, considering the delays in witness statements and the lack of direct evidence linking him to the crime in the initial stages of the investigation.