1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3825 OF 2010 Vilas S/o Bapurao Bhaure ..APPLICANT -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT ......... Mr. N.L. Jadhav, Advocate for applicant. Mr. B.J. Sonawane, A.P.P. for respondent. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 14 th October, 2010. PER COURT : 1. The application is for bail. The applicant is arrested in connection with Crime No. 18/2010 registered at Shivajinagar Police Station, Nanded for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 364 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleges that on 19th January, 2010 deceased Milind @ Munna was taken away in Maruti Van vehicle, owned and driven by the applicant, after liquor bout in the evening, to a place in the agricultural land of the applicant. His dead body was found on the next day with multiple injuries on his person. 2. The charge sheet is already filed after due investigation. 2 3. Upon hearing the learned Advocate for the applicant, the learned A.P.P. and on going through the investigation papers, it is manifest that the offence is of serious nature. Deceased Milind @ Munna was allegedly taken away by the applicant and his accomplishes in the relevant evening. They together went in Maruti Van vehicle of the applicant. It prima facie appears that the applicant had lost employment before few months due to alleged criminal misappropriation of the funds of the employer and deceased Milind @ Munna was the instrumental in giving information to the employer about the said misappropriation committed by the applicant. It prima facie appears that there was deep rooted sense of revenge in the mind of the applicant due to such past incident, and therefore, deceased Milind @ Munna was taken away in the relevant evening by him and the accomplishes. There is police statement of P.W. Kunal Kamble, which reveals that the applicant was in the company of the deceased just before the loss of life was noticed. 4. Though the evidence of the prosecution can not be scrutinised at this juncture yet prima facie evaluation of such evidence is required to be done in order to find out whether a prima facie case is made out against the applicant or he has been detained without existence of such material about his complicity. 3 Nobody will deny that if there is no tangible material against the accused, then he can not deprived of liberty. In the present case, there is police statement of Kunal, which implicates the applicant and so also the recovery of dead body was made from the agricultural land of the applicant. The postmortem notes indicate that the deceased died due to excessive hemorrhage as a result of injury. It was noticed that there was cut-throat wound. Thus, the prosecution story that deceased Milind @ Munna was slitted by neck is corroborated on account of nature of injuries found on his person. It further appears that the knife used in the commission of crime was recovered at the instance of the applicant in pursuance to the Section 27 of the Evidence Act. This is material evidence which can not be dislodged at the present premature stage. It appears that deceased Milind @ Munna was made to drink liquor in excessive quantity and when he was intoxicated, the applicant and others took him in Maruti Van vehicle of the applicant to the agricultural land. It appears that on the common boundary of the agricultural land of the applicant and his neighbour, deceased Milind @ Munna was slitted by neck. In this view of the material gathered during the course of investigation, there appears chain of circumstances which go to point out not only needle of suspicion against the applicant but finger towards him to infer his complicity. Under the circumstances, the application deserves to be 4 dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. The observations made in the order may not be considered while deciding the Sessions Case on its own merits. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/cri3825.10