1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.: 319 OF 2009 Laxman S/o Gundayya Rajkindwar Versus The State of Maharashtra and others. *** Mr. V. D. Sonawane, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. K. M. Suryawanshi, A.P.P. for the Respondent/ State. Mr. Alok Sharma, Standing Counsel for the Union of India. *** 1. Heard learned counsel for the Accused/ applicant and counsel for Respondent No.3. The Applicant/ accused has requested that the order rejecting discharge, though prayed by prosecution, by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in Sessions Case No.14 of 2007 dated 20th September, 2008 is illegal, erroneous as well as needs to be quashed and set aside. 2. On 6th April, 2006 at about 01.50 hours an explosion took place at the residence of present accused/ applicant. In the said explosion, his son Naresh and Himanshu Panse expired, while four others, who were present at the time of occurrence Accused No.1 Rahul Manohar Pandey, Accused No.8 Maroti Wagh, Accused No.9 Yogesh D. Vidulkar and Accused No.10 Gururaj Jairam Tuptewar suffered serious injuries. Explosion associated with fire also damaged the household articles. 3. Investigation was carried ultimately by the 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. C.B.I. having taken the same from the Special Investigation Team Anti-terrorist Squad (A.T.S.) of the State of Maharashtra. During the course of investigation, it revealed that no evidence could be collected and produced to prove complicity of Laxman Rajkindwar (present applicant) either in causing explosion or harbouring the offender. Indeed he was not present at his residence when the explosion took place. No evidence could be produced on record to prove that he had knowledge about the activity of his deceased son or his other associates and ultimately C.B.I. sought discharge of the said accused. It was, thereafter, that the matter was moved before the learned Sessions Judge. He passed order below Exhibit-1 rejecting the prayer of C.B.I. and observed that it does not seem to be justified to discharge the accused from the array as the Accused No.2 (applicant herein) was owner of the said house where the explosion has taken place. According to the learned Judge there was huge stock of crackers found in the house, it cannot be believed that the accused applicant was unaware of the same. 4. It is a matter of record, prosecution has not come with a case of storage of crackers but it is a case of explosion of either the crude bomb or a bomb. The prosecution as against the others is attracting punishment under section 4 (b) of Explosive Substance Act, 1908 and section 304 read with 34 of I.P.C. and also under section 25 (1-B) (a) of the Arms Act, 1959. 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. Since the prosecuting agency could not collect any evidence against the present applicant, it was justified in making such application before the learned Sessions Judge. The observations of the learned Judge in para 2 of the order dated 20th September, 2009 more lean to the mere surmises than the fact situation. The accused/ applicant can well be cited as witnesses for prosecution in order to explain the situation it prevailed for the accused persons to assemble in the house and to coordinate the alleged explosion or the accidental explosion. The order under challenge is set aside. The accused applicant is discharged from prosecution. Bail bonds cancelled. Surety is discharged. [K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.] Dated:05/08/2009. ans/319