( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3562 OF 2010 Bhadya @ Bahadursing Honjya Vasave APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .... Mr. S.V. Chaudhari, advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.D. Godbharle, APP for the respondent/State. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 8th October, 2010] PER COURT : 1. This is an application for bail. 2. Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned A.P.P. 3. The chargesheet is already filed against the applicant for the alleged offence of committing culpable homide of a minor boy named Indrasingh. He was aged about 7/8 years. It is alleged that on 16th May, 2010, at about 4 p.m, Indrasingh was playing in the courtyard of the house when the applicant allured him to accompany under the pretext that he ( 2 ) would purchase a ice-stick (kulfi) for him. The minor - Indrasingh went with the applicant but did not return home till evening. On next day morning, his dead-body was found by side of river bank. It was noticed that Indrasingh was injured and blood had oozed from the nostrils and ears. The FIR was lodged by sister of deceased Indrasingh, alleging that he was done to death by dropping a stone on his head, by the applicant. 4. The learned advocate for the applicant would submit that there was bad blood between father of deceased Indrasingh and one Ratansingh Vasave. It is argued that due to prior enmity, the present applicant is falsely implicated in the criminal case. 5. The FIR purports to show that father of deceased Indrasingh is prosecuted and a criminal case is pending against him before the learned Judicial Magistrate (F.C.) at Taloda on basis of complaint filed by said Ratansingh Vasave. In such a case, the counter blast could be on part of the father of deceased Indrasingh and it does not stand to reason that by way of counter blast to such a criminal case, the applicant would be falsely implicated. What appears from the ( 3 ) recitals of the FIR and other investigation papers is that the applicant had allured the minor - Indrasingh in the relevant noon to go with him under the pretext that he would purchase an ice-stick (kulfi) for him and, therefore, the minor had gone with the applicant. The minor did not return home and, therefore, was searched for by his relatives including the mother and the sister. They also had searched for the applicant. They noticed that the applicant also was missing and the minor was not found till the late evening. These are tale-telling circumstances. Considering these aspects, the applicant is not entitled to claim liberty and particularly, when the sessions case is likely to be commenced within a short period. The application is, therefore, dismissed. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/criapln3562-10