1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3370/ 2009 [Umesh s/o Damodhar Yawale vs. State of Maharashtra ) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. D R Khandare, Adv.for applicant Mr. S B Ahirkar , APP for Respondent .......... CORAM : A.P.BHANGALE, J. DATED : JANUARY 14, 2010. Heard submissions at the Bar. 2. The applicant prays for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 51/2009 for offence punishable under sections 302, 201, 364 read with sec.34 of the IPC, reported at Hingana Police Station. It appears the case of the prosecution that one Nirmala Narayan Gopache had lodged a complaint alleging that there was some dispute between one Bhola and her son- in-law Rishikesh. Later on, her son-in-law Rishikesh was found dead. She suspected Bhola Sharavan Pardhi and made a oral report on the basis of which Bhola came to be arrested on 8.3.2009. In the course of invetigation it was found that Mobile No. 9326965181 was in frequent communication with Mobile No. 9371195013. It was also revealed in the course of investigation that Mobile No. 9371195013 belongs to the present applicant while Mobile No. 9326965181 belongs to the wife of the deceased Rishikesh. It is also disclosed in the course of 2 investigation that the wife of the deceased was having an illicit relationship with the present applicant. Thus, a startling fact was revealed that murder of Rishikesh was committed as the result of conspiracy secretly hatched by the applicant and his associates. Blood stained clothes were also recovered at the instance of the alleged associate of the present applicant; while incriminating Mobile Phone and SIM card has been recovered at the instance of present applicant. It was also disclosed in the course of investigation that the applicant had tried to destoy the evidence of gruesome murder. The call details in respect of telephonic communication, however, indicte frequent communication between wife of Rishikesh and the present applicant, thereby giving strong motive for the applicant to eliminte Rishikesh. Under these circumstances, since the applicant had already made frentic efforts to destroy the evidence ; so also the progress of the investigation being stymied, the bail plea is objected tooth and nail at the instance of learned APP. 3. Charge sheet is already filed and sessions case No. 125/2009 is pending in the Sessions Court, Nagpur. The plea for bail by the applicant before the learned Additional Sesisons Judge, Nagpur was rejected on 29.7.20097. Considering the tell-a-tale circumstances as against the applicant and his alleged associates in hatching a plan to murder Rishikesh, the material 3 collected during the investigation which prima facie points out involvement of the applicant, I am not inclined to grant bail. Moreover, if the applicant is released on bail the possibility of his tampering the prosecution evidence cannot be ruled out, more so when he was in alleged illicit relationship with the wife of deceased. Under these circusmtances, I am not inclined to take a different view of the matter than that taken by the learned Addl. Sessons Judge,Nagpur. However, the learned Addl.Sesisons Judge is expected to hear and decide the trial as early as possible. Applicaiton is rejected. JUDGE sahare