1 CA 5246.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5246 OF 2010 Ajay Tukaram Kadu .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr.K.S.Patil for the applicant. Ms.P.P.Shinde APP for the State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : 25th JANUARY, 2011. P.C.: 1. The applicant seeks to be released on bail in Crime No.9 of 2010 registered with Dattawadi Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under section 302, 147, 148, 149 read with 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that the deceased – Kishor Marne had entered into criminal conspiracy with several persons. About two years prior to the incident the deceased Kishor Marne was fired at but was saved. The incident of present case occured on 11.1.2010. Kishor Marne and his friend – Vijay Marne, who lodged 2 CA 5246.10 the FIR had been to Nilayam Theatre to see a film and after that at about 6 pm they went to Platinum hotel. The owner of that hotel was friend of the deceased – Kishor Marne. When Kishore, Vijay and their friend Bharat and the owner of hotel were chit-chatting, accused Datta Gole and Munna Shaikh alongwith one more person came in the hotel and straight went to the table where Kishor and his friends were sitting. Datta Gole, Munna Shaikh and their companion assaulted Kishor. Munna Shaikh allegedly assaulted on abdomen of Kishor with Koyta or Sickel. Datta Gole took out revolver and fired at Kishor. Datta Gole and another companion were firing inside and outside of the hotel. Kishor was taken to hospital where he was declared dead. The first informant – Vijay Marne came to know from one Anant Hedav that about 7-8 persons had ran away from the hotel after the incident. 3. According to the prosecution though the present applicant was not actual assailant he was in conspiracy with other culprits and he was continuously in contact with Hemant Dabekar on mobile and he was keeping other culprits informed about location of Kishor. It is contended that closed circuit T.V. footage of the hotel 3 CA 5246.10 would also indicate presence of the present applicant in the hotel. 4. The present applicant was arrested on 15.1.2010. The investigation was completed and charge-sheet was filed, alongwith the charge-sheet footage of the closed Circuit T.V. or report of said footage was not filed to show that the present applicant was also present there. That report is not available with the prosecution even today. According to learned A.P.P. on 20th January, 2011 a letter has been addressed to ballastic expert about that report. It means that when the charge-sheet was filed the prosecution had no material to show presence of the present applicant at the spot. 5. According to the prosecution, the present applicant was in contact with Hemant Dabekar from his mobile No. 96045 69899 and No.99603 73383, however, the details furnished by the Idea Cellular Ltd. Mobile Services provider show that mobile phone No.96045 69899 stands in the name of Narayan Gole and not in the name of present applicant - Ajay Tukaram Kadu. The second mobile No. 98603 73383 stands in the name of one Jagtar Singh Gill as per information given by the service provider Bharti Airtel. The statements of two persons in whose name, the 4 CA 5246.10 number stands were not recorded to show that said mobile numbers were in use of the present applicant. Not only this, mobile no.96230 26522 on which number the present applicant was allegedly in contact with Hemant Dabekar also does not stand in the name of Hemant Dabekar but in the name of one Ganesh as per report from the Idea Cellular Ltd. There is no other material at present to show complicity of the present applicant. 6. In view of the above circumstances the applicant be released on his executing P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount with condition that he shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses. 7. The application stands disposed of. (J.H. BHATIA, J)