1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 2488 of 2009 Madhukar @ Yadayya s/o Lingayya Kawali Vs. 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. H.P. Lingayat, Advocate for applicant Ms. S.S. Wandile, APP for State. Coram: A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 24th August, 2009 1. The applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No.40/2004 reported at Purada Police Station, District – Gadchiroli under sections 302, 120(B), 147, 148, 149 read with 3/25 of Arms Act. 2. The learned Advocate for the applicant submits that applicant is under trial prisoner since long. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 2nd August, 2004. It was alleged that deceased Ramlal Narote was dragged out of his house, tied to the electric pole and was killed by firing bullets from 12 bore rifle. The accused kept one chit having slogan “Naxalwadi Zindabad”. Learned Advocate for the applicant contended that the offence is sought to be proved by means of statements recorded of persons who were also allegedly involved in the Naxalist activity. However, according to the learned A.P.P., the prosecution has sought to rely upon statements of two witnesses who had surrendered before the police under the scheme declared by the State Government in August, 2008. 2 Thus learned A.P.P. submitted that their evidence on oath as eye witnesses would be material. According to them, the present applicant used 12 bore rifle and shot at the deceased Ramlal Narote. Considering the statements of two eye witnesses recorded under Section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code as also Post Mortem Notes indicating cause of death due to hemorrhagic shock due to the homicidal bullets injuries. I think accusations against applicant are very serious. He is from Andhra Pradesh and he is involved in number of cases and in case he enlarged on bail, he can tamper with the evidence of eye witnesses and may abscond in view of prospects long sentence of imprisonment of life or death penalty. Therefore, considering the very serious nature of accusations and possibility of abscondence of the applicant/accused, bail cannot be granted. Hence, bail application is rejected. 3. Learned Advocate for the applicant stated that the trial is at the stage of the framing of charge in Sessions Court, Gadchiroli. It is expected that since incident is of August 2004, trial Court shall endeavour to decide the sessions case as early as possible. Judge. adgokar