{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3810 OF 2009 Mahadeo s/o Haribhau Nakhate Age-67 years, Occ-Agri R/o Hasnabad, Tq-Dharur Dist-Beed APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through Police Inspector, Kaij Police Station, Dist-Beed RESPONDENT ....... Mr.N.L.Jadhav, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.B.Patil, APP for the State Mr.C.K.Shinde, Advocate for original complainant ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 2nd December 2009 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail on connection with CR No.91/2009 registered with Kaij Police Station for an offence punishable u/s 302 and 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. {2} 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by the submissions of the learned APP, who is assisted by Mr.C.K.Shinde, learned counsel for the original complainant. Also perused the papers of investigation as the charge sheet is filed after completion of the investigation. 3. Considering the submissions across the bar and on perusal of the papers of investigation, it appears that the offence came to be lodged on the complaint of one Vaijnath Bobade against the present applicant and one co-accused on the ground that the dead body of the brother of the complainant, Ankush, was found in front of an open ground of Sane Guruji Nivasi Vidyalaya. The throat of the deceased was cut with a sharp cutting object. Pursuant to the said complaint the applicant and the co-accused came to be arrested on 17th May 2009. Now the investigation is over and the charge sheet is also filed. Learned counsel for the parties are unable to inform as to whether the case is committed to the Court of Sessions or not. 4. During the course of submissions, it is urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that this is not a case of direct evidence, however the case of the prosecution rests on circumstantial evidence. According to learned counsel for the applicant, the circumstances against the applicant are that the weapon is recovered at his instance and the blood found on his clothes as well as on the clothes of the deceased is matching and {3} there is no other circumstance against the applicant. So far as motive behind the crime is concerned, according to learned counsel for the applicant, the same cannot be established from the papers of investigation and hence it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail. 5. The application is opposed by the learned APP on the ground that there is statement of witnesses, who have seen the applicant along with the deceased in the night of the incident. 6. It appears from the Postmortem notes that the death of the deceased is homicidal death. The only question, at least at this stage, for consideration is that whether there is prima facie evidence to link the applicant in connection with this offence. Perusal of the statement of the witness Sunder indicate that this witness has seen the applicant and the deceased in the early hours of night of 16th May 2009, whereas the dead body was recovered in the morning of 17th May 2009. So far as report of the CA is concerned, the same indicate that the blood found on the clothes of applicant and blood on the weapon, recovered at the instance of the applicant, is the same. It cannot be termed as a coincidence. However, at the same time, considering the other aspects and the age of the applicant, case is made out to release the applicant on bail by imposing stringent conditions. 7. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant {4} be released on bail on his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.25,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. The applicant not to contact the prosecution witnesses after releasing on bail. The application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/criapln3810-09 {5} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4159 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3810 OF 2009 Vaijnath Raghunath Bobade APPLICANT VERSUS Mahadeo Haribhau Nakhate & Another RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.C.K.Shinde, Advocate for the applicant Mr.N.L.Jadhav, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr.N.B.Patil, APP for the State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 2nd December 2009 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant seeks leave of the Court to assist the APP for opposing the criminal application No.3810/2009. Respondents have no objection to allow the application. In the premise, the application is allowed. Mr.Shinde is allowed to assist the learned APP. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/criapln3810-09