BA-543-891.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.543 OF 2011 Johnson Jeremiya Nadar ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Park Site Police Station, Vikhroli, Mumbai ... Respondent ALONG WITH CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.891 OF 2011 Ravi Padmaamabhan Reddy @ Asha Amma ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Park Site Police Station, Vikhroli, Mumbai ... Respondent Mr. Girish Kulkarni, i/b. Mr. M.G. Shukla, for the Applicant in BA/543/2011. Mr. Mahesh Jethmalani, Sr. Counsel, i/b. Dinesh Tiwari & Associates, for the Applicant in BA/891/2011. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP, for the Respondent. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 30 TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. : 1. Both these Bail Applications are being decided by this common order as the Applicants are the accused in the same case. 2. The case of the Investigating Agency is that one Gopi Amma alias Ansar Asha, a person from transsexual class, was murdered by two persons, (who have BA-543-891.sxw 2 Dixit not been apprehended), on 26th November, 2010. The said Ansar Asha was, apparently, a leader of the group of transsexual persons. She was holding and possessing some property, consisting of twelve rooms, in which persons from transsexual class were residing. Ravi Reddy @ Asha Amma, (the Applicant in Bail Application No.891 of 2011), was one of the transsexual persons residing in one of the said rooms and was in the group of the deceased Gopi Amma alias Ansar Asha. It appears that Johnson Nadar (the Applicant in Bail Application No.543 of 2011) and Murgan Nadar, who are Builders and Developers, were interested in purchasing the said property which was owned, or occupied by the said Gopi Amma @ Ansar Asha. It also appears that Gopi Amma was not ready to sell or transfer the property. Asha Amma @ Ravi Reddy used to say that the rooms should either be transferred in her name, or they should be sold to the said Johnson Nadar and Murgan Nadar; and there used to quarrels between Gopi Amma and Asha Amma over this issue. The case of the Investigating Agency is that the said Johnson Nadar and Murgan Nadar got Gopi Amma murdered, and that, Asha Amma either had conspired with them, or had aided and abetted them in committing the said murder. 3. I have heard Mr. Jethmalani, the learned Advocate for the Applicant in Bail Application No.891 of 2011, and Mr. Kulkarni, the learned Advocate for the Applicant in Bail Application No.543 of 2011. 4. With the assistance of the learned Counsel and the learned APP, I have gone through the entire Charge-Sheet, copy of which has been annexed to the Bail Applications. 5. That Gopi Amma @ Ansar Asha died a homicidal death is not in dispute. It also appears that she was attacked by two persons in the afternoon of 26th BA-543-891.sxw 3 Dixit November, 2010. The two persons, who are said to be the actual assailants, were previously seen by some persons, (whose statements have been recorded in the course of investigation) and according to those persons the said persons had been seen by them previously when they had come to Ansar Asha with Johnson Nadar (the Applicant in Bail Application No.543 of 2011) and Murgan Nadar. 6. On this material, the Investigating Agency concludes that the assailants had been sent by the said Johnson Nadar and Murgan Nadar, and that the said Asha Amma (the Applicant in Bail Application No.891 of 2011) had conspired with the actual assailants and that, therefore, she is also involved in the murder. 7. After hearing the learned Advocates for the Applicants, I feel that the case of the Applicant-Johnson Nadar and the case of the Applicant-Asha Amma cannot be said to be on par for the purposes of bail. 8. As regards the Applicant-Johnson Nadar, there is sufficient material to indicate that he was interested in purchasing the property in question, and that he had attempted to negotiate with the deceased in her capacity as the head of the group of transsexual persons. It also appears that the deceased was not ready to sell or transfer the said property. Considering the material that is in the Charge Sheet, the possibility of the actual assailants having acted at the instance of the Applicant- Johnson Nadar and Murgan Nadar-who is absconding- is reasonable and can be accepted at this stage. This is particularly so, because I am informed that the possession of part of the property has already been taken by the said Johnson Nadar and this statement made by the learned APP gets some support from the copy of the affidavit-in-support of the Chamber Summons No.404 of 2011 in Suit No.984 of 2010, which had been filed by the deceased against the Applicant- Johnson Nadar. At any rate, there exists a grave suspicion against the Applicant BA-543-891.sxw 4 Dixit Johnson Nadar and it cannot be said that, at this stage, there exists no prima facie case against the Applicant-Johnson Nadar. 9. Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, I am not inclined to release the Applicant-Johnson Nadar on bail. 10. As regards the Applicant-Asha Amma, the role attributed to her is of supporting the said Johnson Nadar and Murgan Nadar. Undoubtedly, there is material to suggest that Asha Amma wanted the deceased to sell or dispose of the property in favour of the Builders. However, Mr. Jethmalani, the learned Senior Advocate for the Applicant in Bail Application No.891 of 2011, contended that even if this is accepted as true, it would not show that the Applicant-Asha Amma was a conspirator to the act of murder, or that she, in any way, aided and abetted the commission of the said murder. He submitted that there are some documents, which are forming part of the compilation, which he has tendered and, according to him, these documents suggest that this Applicant was not present on the spot at the time of the incident. Though, I am not inclined to go deeper into this aspect of the matter which can be satisfactorily decided only on the basis of evidence, the fact remains that except that she did not resist the assailants and that the actual assailants treated her differently from the others, who were present on the scene of the offence, there is no other material to support the allegation against her. It, indeed, appears that she was interested in the sale of the property in question to the Builders. There is material suggesting that she tried to hush up the matter by attempting to give some false explanation about the incident. However, though she was for the Builders, obviously for pecuniary gain, the extent of her involvement in the matter and role that can be attributed to her in the murder of the said Gopi Amma may very well be doubted. It does not appear that she made any gain by the BA-543-891.sxw 5 Dixit death of the said Gopi Amma. Even otherwise, her role, if any, in the murder appears to be secondary; and considering that she is a person from transsexual class, I am inclined to take a sympathetic view of the matter as regards her. Her case cannot be equated with the Johnson Nadar, who is alleged to have got killed a person, to advance his professional interest. 11. In the result, the Bail Application No.891 of 2011 is allowed. 12. The Applicant in Bail Application No.891 of 2011 is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.30,000/-, with one surety in like amount, on the condition that she shall not enter the localities of transsexual persons in Vikhroli and Bhandup area. 13. The Bail Application No.543 of 2011 is rejected. 14. However, on the prayer made by Mr. Kulkarni, the learned Advocate for the Applicant in Bail Application No.543 of 2011, it is directed that the trial Court shall expedite the trial and endeavour to complete it within a period of three months from today. 15. Liberty to the Applicant in Bail Application No.543 of 2011 to apply afresh for bail, should the trial be not over by that time. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]