1 Cri-A-1-2011.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2011 Devendra @ Chakor Umakant Pille ... Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondent Mr. V.B.Naik i/b . Mr. Subhash Hulyalkar,Advocate, for the applicant.. Ms. P.P.Shinde, APP, for the respondent - State. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 7th January, 2011. P.C. 1. The applicant was arrested on 4.5.2010 in Crime No.73/2010 registered at Vadgaon-Mawal Police Station, Pune, for the offence under Section 302 read with Sec. 34 of IPC. According to the prosecution, on 23.4.2010 at about 2 p.m. deceased Stanley had left his house and thereafter he did not come back. On 29.4.2010, his dead body was discovered which was found lying on hillock on the basis of information given by the present applicant. During his interrogation, it was revealed that because of the old dispute, the present applicant and his friends had taken Stanley to the said hillock under the pretext that a liquor party was arranged. After the dead body was found, the police informed Mari, who is mother of the deceased and she lodged the report on 29.4.2010 and the offence 2 Cri-A-1-2011.sxw came to be registered. On the same day, statement of wife of the deceased was also recorded. On 13.7.2010, Shila wife of the deceased disclosed that she had illicit relations with the present applicant and the present applicant was not happy because deceased Stanley was not working or earning anything . According to her, the accused had killed him to grab the lady. Post-mortem report reveals that the death had occurred due to fracture of the skull bone and injury to brain. 2. The learned Counsel for the applicant pointed out that except the discovery of the dead body on the basis of the alleged statement made by the present applicant, there is no evidence to connect him with the said offence. Admittedly, there was no eye-witness. There is no witness who had seen the accused last with the deceased. No weapon was recovered. No other material was recovered from the accused to establish that he had committed the offence. Shila, wife of the deceased did not disclose before the police about her illicit relations with the present applicant in her first statement dated 29.4.2009. The learned Counsel also points out that some other accused have been already released on bail. 3. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the applicant be released on his executing P.R. of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount 3 Cri-A-1-2011.sxw with condition that he shall not tamper with prosecution evidence. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)