1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3099/2009 ( (1) Shashikala w/o Ramchandra Tupkar and another vs. State of Maharashtra ) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order Mr Abhay Sambre, Adv. for applicants Mr.Anup Parihar , APP for Respondent-State *** C ORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 16 th September, 2009. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants. The accusations against the applicants are serious. It is alleged that on 24.6.2009 at about 9.30 a.m. the first informant and his employer -Prabhakar Nalinde went to the agricultural field in Gunj Shivar by a motorcycle. When the first informant was briefing about the agricultural activities in the agricultural field belonging to Prabhakar Nalinde, one woman with three men came out of hut and asked Prabhakar to leave the agricultural field, that ensued exchange of hot words and dispute. One of the assailants threw chilly powder in the eyes of Prabhakar. Prabhakar started saying “ ” at that point of time, other person who was armed with sickle assaulted Prabhakar on his head. When Prabhakar questioned as to why he was assaulting, the sickle in the hand of the assailant fell, therefore, that person took an axe from the hand of another person standing there and assaulted Prabhakar on his head. The person, by name, Umesh had also assaulted Prabhakar by means of chain, while person by name Yogesh was saying not to leave Prabhakar alive and shall be killed. The mother of said Yogesh was present, to whom he was talking. 2. In the course of investigation, it appears that statement of some witnesses came to be recorded who appear to have stated about the statement 2 made by the deceased in their presence, indicating involvement of this applicants in the incident of assault which ultimately resulted into death of Prabhakar. It also appears from the material collected during the course of investigation that post-mortem notes indicated multiple injuries. As regards opinion as to cause of death, it is mentioned as due to intra cerebral bleed as a result of head injury and polytrauma. The names of accused Yogesh, Ramesh and Shashikala Tupkar are revealed in the FIR itself; while the name of the applicant no.2-Ramchandra disclosed in the course of investigation. The weapon of offence was recovered at the instance of Yogesh. 3. According to the learned Advocate for the applicants there was previous enmity due to civil dispute and that the names of these applicants may have been involved by the first informant and their family members due to prior enmity; whereas learned APP contended that the witnesses have stated about oral dying declaration made by the deceased who awaiting his death, could not have falsely implicated these applicants by naming them in his oral dying declaration, that too in the presence of various witnesses. It is reported that charge-sheet in the matter is not yet filed. 4. In view of the above discussion, I am not inclined to consider the plea for bail. However, the applicants are at liberty to apply for bail on merits, after the charge-sheet is filed in the trial Court. Application is rejected. JUDGE sahare