Cri. Apln. No. 2430/2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2430 OF 2011 Mukund Digambar Surwade ....Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent. Mr. Joydeep Chatterji, Advocate for applicant. Mr. S.G. Nandedkar, APP for State/respondent. CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 8th July, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for bail in Cr. No. 13/2011 registered with Bazar Peth Police Station, Bhusawal for offences punishable under sections 302 etc. of IPC. The papers of investigation were made available by APP. Both the sides are heard. 2. The deceased Dwarkaprasad was son of complainant, Sushilabai Jain. Dwarkaprasad had a love affair with the sister of applicant. The family of applicant belongs to different community and the family of deceased belongs to Jain community. Allegations are made that present applicant and his brother were against this marriage and so the relations between them and deceased were strained. Cri. Apln. No. 2430/2011 2 3. Incident took place on 27.1.2011. On that day after 6.30 pm Dwarkaprasad contacted his mother on phone and he informed that when he and his wife reached to the house of applicant, at that time brothers of wife had rushed at him and they had given his abuses. After some time at 7.30 pm the complainant learnt that Dwarkaprasad was lying injured at corner near Sona Shopping Complex. She went there and she made inquiry with Dwarkaprasad. Dwarkaprasad disclosed that present applicant and his brother Deepak had assaulted him with iron pipe. Dwarkaprasad succumbed to injuries. 4. The papers of investigation show that as many as six injuries, which were CLWs, were found on the face and head. There was fracture of bones of face. There was subdural haemorrhage at bitemporal region of weight 3000 gms. The death took place due to cardiorespiretory failure due to shock due to intracaranial haemorrhage and poly truma. There are statements of many eye witnesses including the statement of sister and relatives of deceased. There are statements of independent eye witnesses also, who had seen the present applicant, making assault with iron bar on deceased. It was submitted that the iron bar was recovered from Deepak and there is no possibility that present applicant had also used it. This submission cannot be accepted at this stage. There is also statement of Maya, sister of the applicant and to her some disclosure Cri. Apln. No. 2430/2011 3 was made by the applicant immediately after the incident. Thus, there is direct and circumstantial evidence and the material on record is sufficient to make out prima facie case against the applicant under section 302 of IPC. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, there is clear possibility that there will be tampering with the prosecution witnesses, if the applicant is released on bail. So this Court holds that it is not a fit case for granting bail and the application stands rejected. Observations made in this proceedings are prima facie and they will not come in the way of Trial Court while deciding the case. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] ssc/criapln2430/11