1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO: 2691 /2009 ( Suraj s/o Chintaman Pullarwar vs. State of Maharashtra ) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order Mr R.M. Daga, Adv. for applicant Mr.Anup Parihar, APP for respondent-State C ORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 21st August, 2009. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in respect of Crime No. 48/2008 reported at Mul Police Station, District : Chandrapur for offence punishable under sections 302, 396, 412, 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned Advocate for the applicant contended that the applicant was a Driver by occupation and merely on the basis of alleged statement that the applicant had shown various spots to the Police, he is being sought to be implicated in serious accusations. According to the prosecution itself, the incident had occurred on or about 8.2.2009 ; however, the FIR was registered on 27.2.2009 i.e. after 19 days. It is pertinent to note that the dead body was found on the same day i.e. 8.2.2009. It is also contended that there is no prima facie case to connect the applicant with serious accusations of murder punishable u/s 302 IPC; as also receiving stolen property as outcome of dacoity punishable under sec.412 and 201 IPC. Learned Advocate further contended that the mere statement of the accused which is confessional in nature was recorded under sec. 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and, therefore, in absence of any prima facie material sufficient enough to implicate the applicant in the serious accusations, he may be enlarged on bail. 2 3. On the other hand, learned APP contended that as many as 380 bags of cement were sold to the present applicant -Suraj and that while in custody he had shown various spots in the jungle right from the spot of interception pf the goods of truck till the spot where the dead body was found. As such, there is no discovery of incriminating material consequent upon the alleged statement made u/s 27 of the Evidence Act. No criminal antecedents are pointed against the applicant, who is about 20 years of age and, as stated above, is a Driver by occupation. Under these circumstances, considering that chances his conviction may be remote, the applicant may be granted conditional bail, so as to ensure his presence at the time of trial. Hence the order: The applicant be released on bail in respect of Crime No. 48/2008 reported at Mul Police Station, District : Chandrapur for offence punishable under sections 302, 396, 412, 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, upon executing a PR bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- with one or more sureties in the equal amount, provided further that he shall attend the trial on each date of hearing; shall not misuse his liberty in any manner and shall not commit any crime while on bail. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witness or witnesses connected with the case and shall inform his fixed address/ change in address with telephone number, if any, to the Investigating Officer. Application stands disposed of. JUDGE. sahare