appln-2755-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 2755 of 2010 Pandit Mahadu Pawar vs. The State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr S. K.Shinde, for the Applicants. Mr K. V. Saste, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 3RD AUGUST, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions for some time on this application for regular bail preferred by the applicants who are facing charge for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 506 read with section 34 of I.P.C. registered with Manmad Police Station, District Nashik. 2. Admittedly, there are five to six eye-witnesses and the first informant also taking the names of present applicants along with one more co-accused as the assailants. Investigation is already over and appln-2755-10 charge-sheet is also filed. 3. The incident of assault took place on the night of 9.11.2009 at the house of the deceased. He along with present applicant Nos. 1 and 3 came home on that night. All had consumed liquor and there was some quarrel amongst them regarding the wages to be earned out of agriculture labour. The complainant - wife of the deceased, tried to intervene but without any success. Present applicants and one co- accused, husband of applicant No.2, assaulted the deceased by means of fist blows, kicks and also by using brick bats and wooden log of fire-wood. Role assigned to the present applicant No.2 who is a lady, as to using of fire wood to hit the deceased. After the assault, the applicants and co-accused ran away from the spot giving threats to the complainant. 4. Injured was initially taken to private hospital. He was given medical treatment and was admitted in the hospital at Nashik till 19.11.2009, when he succumbed to the injuries. On the death of said injured, it was thought fit by the present complainant to lodge complaint and accordingly on 21.11.2009 F.I.R. was lodged. On 22.11.2009 present applicants and the co-accused were put under arrest and since then they are inside. appln-2755-10 5. During the arguments, learned advocate for the applicants submitted that it is the case in which complaint is belatedly filed. Even the death occurred after ten days of assault. It is also argued that the belated filing of the FIR is per se smaking of manipulation, inasmuch as according to the complainant herself there was some talks of compromise and as she was not paid any compensation even after the intervention of a Dispute Redressal Committee of the local area, she had lodged a false complaint. Though there is, apparently, delay in lodging the complaint and though there were assurances given by the applicants to pay certain compensation to the complainant when her husband was taking treatment in the hospital, such factual position per se will not lead to this Court to hold that it is entirely a concoction and assigning the role to the applicants is a falsehood. In other words, it must be said that filing of the F.I.R. even after two days of the death of the deceased, cannot be viewed so seriously considering the social status of the present complainant being agriculture labour and virtually living hand to mouth. 6. All the same, as the investigation is already over and there are five to six eye-witnesses, there is nothing to entertain the present application, even for the woman – applicant No.2. In the result, the appln-2755-10 following order:- ORDER: (a) Bail application is rejected. (b) Directions are given to the concerned Additional Sessions Judge, who is seized of the matter, to dispose of the matter within nine months from the receipt of copy of this order. (c) Any observations made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. (A.R.JOSHI,J)