{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2020 OF 2010 1. Fulji Biladya Patale Age-32 years, Occ-Labour 2. Khumji Vangarya Patale Age-35 years, Occ-Labour Both R/o Pathali, Tq-Akrani Dist-Nandurbar APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.R.S.Shinde, Advocate for the applicants Mr.D.V.Tele, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 10th June 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present criminal application, the applicants have prayed to release them on bail in connection with CR No. 47/2009 registered with Dhadgaon police station, Dist-Nandurbar for an offence punishable u/s 302, 452, 504, r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. {2} 2. It is informed that the applicants are arrested on 30th January 2010 and 19th January 2010 respectively and after completion of the investigation charge sheet has been filed on 12th April 2010. 3. As the successive applications for bail filed by the applicants are rejected by the Sessions Court, the applicants are before this Court praying to release them on bail. 4. It appears from the papers of investigation that the alleged incident occurred in the evening of 7th July 2009 and the same was witnessed by complainant Anita. In the first information report, complainant Anita has disclosed names of four persons as assailants whom she had seen killing her grand mother Jermibai. It further appears that later on the said four persons were discharged u/s 169 Criminal Procedure Code on the basis of the police report. It also appears that supplementary statement of complainant Anita came to be recorded on 24th December 2009 wherein she has disclosed that she came to know about the incident while she was returning from the house of her sister and she has disclosed names of the present applicants as they have committed the murder. On the basis of the said supplementary statement, the applicants came to be arrested. However, so far as two other accused are concerned, they are shown an absconding in the charge sheet. {3} 5. In this backdrop heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP. 6. During the course of investigation other than supplementary statement of complainant Anita, statements of two minor witnesses, Ravindra and Sarla who claim themselves to be the eye witnesses, are recorded. Statements of the alleged eye witnesses disclose that they have witnessed the incident where they have disclosed names of present applicants along with two others. They have also stated that after two days of the incident, they have disclosed the names of the present applicants to the complainant Anita. However, inspite of having knowledge about the same, from 9th July 2009 till 24th December 2009, Anita kept mum, and no explanation is offered in the supplementary statement in respect of not stating the said fact immediately to the police. 7. Apart from statement of Anita and two minors, alleged incriminating evidence against the applicants is recovery of the weapon of alleged assault under the provisions of section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act from applicant No.1. Similarly, memorandum of disclosure statement of applicant No.2 is also recorded, however, nothing is recovered in view of the disclosure statement from applicant No.2. 8. P.M. Notes disclose external injuries on the person of {4} the deceased, which are 6 in number. Out of the said 6 injuries all the injuries except injury at serial No.4 are CLW, whereas injury at serial No.4 is in the nature of multipal abrasion over the shoulder. Thus, from the injuries recorded by the medical officer, it is clear that he does not notice any injury like piercing or stab injury or any puncture wound on the person of the deceased, which would tally with the weapon seized at the instance of applicant No.1. 9. Considering the overall effect of statements of complainant Anita, two minors as well as the weapon recovered at the instance of applicant No.1, and the injuries found on the person of the deceased, which do not match with the weapon seized from the applicants, prima facie case is made out to enlarge the applicants on bail, as now even the charge sheet has been filed. 10. In the result, the application is allowed. Both the applicants be released on bail in connection with CR No.47/2009 registered with Dhadgaon police station, on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on executing PR bonds in the like amount. Applicants are directed not to leave the local jurisdiction of the concerned police station till disposal of the trial and not to contact or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2020-10