1appln-865-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 865 of 2010 Adhik Tukaram Jamadade versus State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr Pratap V. Patil, for the Applicant. Mr K. V. Saste, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 7TH JULY, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions for some time on this application preferred by the applicant for regular bail during the pendency of the trial in the matter of offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of I.P.C. 2. Reportedly, there are total five accused persons and all of them were arrested immediately on the next date of the incident. The incident occurred on 3.10.2009 after about 10-00 p.m. Dead body of the deceased was noticed 2appln-865-10 by his younger brother first informant Santaji Sampatrao Patil at about 12-00 mid night. Apparently, the dead body was found in the near proximity of the house of the complainant and during the relevant time wife and the mother of the complainant were sleeping in their house. Their statements did not indicate as to happening of any incident much less quarrel, abuses, fight and assault on the deceased. Allegedly, there are four eye-witnesses whose statements were recorded immediately on the next date of the incident and they mentioned the names of all the assailants including the present applicant. However, none of these eye witnesses either informed the family members of the complainant or informed the nearby persons or at least the local police. After seeing the incident of assault on the deceased, they left the place and went to their respective homes without even informing the same to the complainant who arrived on the spot by 12:00 mid night. 3. According to the contents of the F.I.R. a sort of motive is alleged against the main accused persons as they were suspecting the deceased as thief of their tape recorder installed on the tractor and main accused were demanding such tape recorder. However, the deceased had denied any such theft. It is further averred in the complaint that on this count the main accused persons had given a threatening call to the complainant at about 7:00 p.m. or 8:00 p.m. on the night of the incident informing him that they will take appropriate measures regarding the brother of the complainant, who had allegedly stolen the tape recorder. On this aspect, it is enquired with the learned A.P.P. as to 3appln-865-10 what is the investigation regarding the telephone call in order to ascertain whether the complainant had received any such telephone call on that night of the incident. However, learned A.P.P. could not answer, probably, because there was no investigation on this aspect. In the opinion of this Court, it is crucial material in order to ascertain the veracity or otherwise of the contents of the complaint as to immediate proximate conduct of the main accused prior to the alleged incident of murder. 4. All the same, as against the present applicant, there are statements of four witnesses seeing the assault on the deceased with fist blows. However, they did not inform the same to anybody. The same role was assigned to another co-accused and who has been released on bail by another Bench vide order dated 8.4.2010. Considering the parity and also considering alleged material as against the present applicant, this application can be allowed on certain conditions. In the result, the following order:- ORDER: (a) Bail application is allowed. (b) The applicant- Adhik Tukaram Jamadade arrested in C.R. No. 79/2009 registered with Ashta Police Station, District Sangli, shall be released on bail on executing a P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000 /- with one surety in the like amount . © On availing the bail the applicant shall attend 4appln-865-10 concerned police station once in a week on every Sunday between 10-00 a.m. to 12.00 till conclusion of the trial. (d) Any observations made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. (e) Application is disposed of accordingly. (A.R.JOSHI,J)