1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.158/2011 (Ajit Kaliram Dhurve .vrs. State of Maharashtra) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. Anil S. Mardikar, Advocate for applicant, Mr. S.B. Ahirkar, APP for non-applicant/State. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : APRIL 01, 2011 Heard. Though prayer for bail made by one of the accused charge sheeted by Karanja Police Station, District-Washim as a result of investigation of Crime No. 127/2010 registered with the said Police Station for offence under sections 302, 323 r/w 34 of IPC is vehemently objected by the learned APP on the count of the acts allegedly committed by the applicant as revealed from the material in the charge sheet denotes that on the said day he was acting in furtherance of common intention of himself and co-accused - his son to commit murder of Sudhakar and his brother Gajanan in view of quarrel ensued in between the co-accused and Sudhakar in the morning on the day of incident on the count of cow belonging to the deceased having 2 trespassed in the fields of the accused persons, still the perusal of the material in the charge sheet and particularly account of incident as revealed from the first information report and statement of injured Gajanan justifies the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that during the incident the applicant was neither armed with the weapon nor used any weapon nor assaulted anybody and the act of catching hold of Gajanan was committed after assault upon the deceased Sudhakar was over and as such prima facie his involvement in the commission of the murder of Sudhakar is not borne. Similarly, his further submission that Gajanan has not suffered any significant injury and was discharged within 3 days after the incident is also found inconsonance with the material in the charge sheet. Similarly his further submission that the applicant was not party to the incident which had occurred earlier and incident had occurred with the deceased Gajanan and first informant were going for lodging the complaint in the evening after they were stopped by co-accused and nor by applicant and there is no material in the charge sheet to show that the applicant was aware that they were going to the Police Station at the said time and as such the incident had occurred at spur of moment mainly between co-accused and victim also cannot be said to be altogether devoid of merit. Having regard to the same and having due regard to the age of the applicant, the prayer for bail made by the applicant deserves consideration. The applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with said crime upon furnishing P.R. 3 Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two separate solvent sureties in the like amount and subject to the conditions that applicant - (i) after his release on bail, shall stay outside the Karanja village, shall intimate his place of abode to the investigating officer, shall not change the same without the permission of the trial Court, shall also attend the local Police Station within whose jurisdiction he would be staying in between 11 am and 1 pm every Monday until further orders; (ii) shall not indulge in any activity of tampering prosecution evidence and/or indulge in any activity of hampering the progress of the trial, (iii) shall not commit any offence while on bail. The application stands disposed of. JUDGE Gulande