1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3149 OF 2010 1. Atmaram Punjaram Wagh, Age-22 years, Occu-Agriculture, 2. Keshav Karbhari Wagh, Age-42 years, Occu-Agriculture APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.Joydeep Chatterji, learned counsel for applicants. Mr.K.S.Patil, learned APP for State CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 13/08/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants are before this Court to get released on bail in connection with CR No.290/2008, registered in Jalna Police Station,, which was initially registered u/s. 363, 364 r/w. 34 of The IPC, in which initially the first applicant was arrested, later on released on bail, but again taken in custody on 03/06/2010, as his application for anticipatory bail was rejected by another Bench of this Court. Applicant no.2, after his application for anticipatory bail was rejected, surrendered before police on 22/04/2010. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in the Court of J.M.F.C. Partur, Dist. Jalna on 16/07/2010. As attempts of the 2 applicants to get released on bail could not succeed before the Lower Courts, they are before this Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned APP for State. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. It appears that originally CR No.290/2008 was registered on the complaint of one Govindrao Pakhare on 12/12/2008 wherein he has alleged that in the night of 30/11/2008, his son Kailas had left his residence for field. In the morning, as usual when Kailas was not returned, the complainant and his another son Shivaji started search of Kailas. When they inquired with the labourers working in their their, they informed that during the night hours, Kailas had not been to the field at all. During further inquiry, it is revealed that in that night one Ganesh and Gajanan have lastly seen deceased Kailas in the company of applicants. It appears that on 07/12/2008, one phone call was received on the cell of complainant from village Umraj, Tal.Karad, Dist. Satara that Kailas is with them and within some days he will return to his residence. The said number was traced and found that it was the number of coin box from village Umraj. During inquiry, the complainant was unable to trace out that person, who had given the information about his son Kailas on phone. 4. It appears that thereafter the investigation in the said case was stopped, but re-opened in April 2010. After the case was re-opened, father of the first applicant was taken in custody. He made a 3 confessional statement that on 21/04/2008, he alongwith these two applicants committed murder of Kailas and his dead body was buried in their agricultural land. Subsequent to that statement of Punjaram, the father of first applicant, one human skeleton with some remnants of clothes was recovered from the place. According to prosecution, father of the deceased identified the dead body as of his son Kailas from the pieces of clothes. During further investigation, at the instance of applicant no.2, one nylon rope, pick axe, and 'tikav', allegedly used as weapons in the crime were recovered on 26/04/2010. It is brought to the notice of this Court that both the applicants, complainant and deceased belong to agriculturist family and the articles recovered at the instance of 2nd applicant are easily available articles in every family of an agriculturist. 5. During the course of submissions across the bar, it is urged that the evidence against first applicant is the statement of accomplice i.e. his father and recovery of one human skeleton from the place pointed out by his father. Evidence against second applicant is the recovery of articles mentioned in paragraph supra. Other than the statements of Ganesh and Gajanan, who have seen the deceased lastly in the company of first applicant in the night of 30/11/2008, there is no other evidence. 6. According to learned APP, after arrest of first applicant, he had faced Narco Test. Considering the result of Narco Test and the incriminating evidence against these applicants, this is a weak piece 4 of evidence. As now the investigation is over, there are no chances of tampering of any evidence at the hands of these applicants. The case of the prosecution is rests on circumstances, as well as the statement of accomplice against first applicant and recovery made against second applicant. Even if this incriminating evidence is accepted as it is, there shall not be any chances of tampering of prosecution's evidence. Considering all these aspects, case is made out to enlarge the applicants on bail, but on putting certain conditions : O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. Applicants be released on bail on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each and on executing PR bonds in the like amount. 3. After released on bail, applicants not to enter in village Gondegaon, Tal. Dist. Jalna, till final disposal of trial against them. They have also to give residential address, where they will reside after released on bail to the Investigation Officer and report to nearest police station on 15th day of each month till disposal of trial against them. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/AUG 2010/cri.appl.3149-10