vks 1 APPLN 3677 OF 2010.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3677 OF 2010. Bapu Dangat .. Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel, with Mr. K.S.Patil, for the Applicant. Mrs. P.P.Shinde, APP for the respondent State. Mr. Uday Warunjikar, for the original complainant in both the cases. WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3778 OF 2010. Nivrutti Parshuram Magar .. Applicant -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. S.P. Kadam with Mr.Pandurang Gaikwad, for the Applicant. Mrs. P.P.Shinde, APP for the respondent State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 7th September, 2010 P.C. 1. These applications are filed by a Professor and employee of the college for admitting them on bail, in the following circumstances. 2. On 8.3.2010, there was gathering in the college. Victim Satish was not the student of that college. He was taken for that vks 2 APPLN 3677 OF 2010.sxw function by informant -complainant Mr. Anil. There is curious statement of one Uday Sing who stated that when he was returning after answering natural call, an un-known person slapped him. He does not claim to have reacted. But one of watchmen saw the incident. But the watchman told of the incident to the Professors and those professors asked this witness to show the who person slapped him. This witness showed the person who slapped him to be deceased Satish. 3. Satish was then chased by the Professors and employees of the college, but Satish ran away and jumped in the lake. 4. It is further alleged that the professors asked the watchmen to go and chase Satish in a boat and give him electric shock. Dead body of Satish was found on 10.3.2010. In the meantime since Satish had not returned on 9.3.2010, Sunil the cousin of Satish had given missing complaint, which makes absolutely no reference of any such incident having taken place or having been conveyed to him. Sunil had stated in his statement recorded on 2.4.2010 that he in fact got knowledge of Satish jumping in the lake on 8.3.2010 itself. There is nothing on record to show the present applicants had beaten the victim or compelled the victim to jump in the lake. 5. The notes of postmortem examination and the answers given by the Medical Officer to the queries raised by Investigating vks 3 APPLN 3677 OF 2010.sxw Officer rule out the injuries allegedly sustained as the cause of death. 6. Recovery of sticks at the instance of some of the applicants is thoroughly irrelevant since they were watchmen and were bound to have sticks. 7. In these circumstances, the applicants seek bail. There is nothing to show that the applicants have electrocuted the victim. There is no previous enmity. There is no motive for assault. There was no chance of being electrocuted as, since 2008, the engine of boat which was allegedly used for chasing and electrocuting was not in working condition. The Medical Officer has not given the cause of death as due to electrocution. 8. In view of above both the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sum of Rs.25,000/-. 9. The learned Trial Judge would obviously not take into consideration any of the observations made while passing this order. These observations are tentatively based on the material which is produced while passing this order. The learned Trial Judge would consider the material which may be produced before him in the trial of the case. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)