1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3549 OF 2009 Maroti Kachru Narwade, Age-62 years, Occu-Agriculturist, R/o.Aajegaon, Tq.Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli. PETITIONER VERSUS State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.Joydeep Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt.Y.M.Kshirsagar, learned APP for respondent State (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 03/11/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with Crime No.49/2009 registered in Goregaon Police Station, Dist. Hingoli for the offences u/s.307, 324, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504 of IPC which was later on converted for an offence punishable u/s. 302 of IPC with other relevant sections. 2. During the course of submissions across the bar, my attention is drawn towards the complaint dated 07/06/2009 and towards the role played by the present applicant as he hit the stone from the backside to the complainant which resulted in the injury sustained 2 by the complainant. He was arrested on 08/06/2009 and since then he is in custody. According to learned counsel appearing for the applicant accused, the charge sheet is already filed on 30/08/2009. The accused is in custody for more than 4 months and his age is 62 years. The other 3 accused Santosh, Parmeshwar and Viju were already released on bail on the earlier occasion. According to learned advocate appearing for the applicant that if the condition is put on the applicant not to enter into the village where the complainant and other witnesses are residing, then the question of tampering the witnesses is not arise and on this ground prayed to release the applicant accused on bail. 3. While opposing the bail application, according to learned APP appearing for the respondent states that considering the serious nature of the offence, accused may not be released on bail. There is also likelihood that the applicant may tamper the witnesses of the prosecution as they are the close relatives of each other. 4. Considering these submissions across the bar and the role is disclosed as played by the applicant accused during the course of alleged incident occured on 07/06/2009, it appears that the applicant accused had hit the stone towards the head of the complainant which resulted in the injury sustained by the complainant, which injury as per the medical certificate is simple injury. At this juncture, I am not on the point whether injury sustained by the complainant is simple or otherwise, but it is 3 necessary to consider the role played by the applicant accused during the alleged offence as disclosed from the FIR. The person who was dead during the incident is Samadhan as the depressed fracture was noted on the skull of deceased Samadhan as per the medical certificate, but so far as this injury caused to the deceased was not attributed because of the act of the applicant as per the disclosure of the incident stated in the FIR, then considering the role played by the applicant accused, his age, this is a case where this Court can exercise the discretion to release him on bail, hence the application deserves following order : O R D E R 1. The applicant accused be released on bail on furnishing security in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on execution of the PR bond in the like amount. 2. After releasing on bail, the applicant accused is prohibited to enter in village Aajegaon, Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli till the trial against the applicant and other accused will over. 3. The applicant accused not to tamper with the witnesses of the prosecution. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly in the above terms. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/NOV 2009/cri.appl.3549-09