{1} Cri. Application No.3832/2011 drp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3832 OF 2011 Dagadu Thaka Paradhi APPLICANT Age-28 years, Occ-Agri R/o Mogras, Tq-Akole Dist-Ahmednagar VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.S.T.Shelke, Advocate for the applicant Mr.K.M.Suryawanshi, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 14 th October 2011 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant, who is charge sheeted u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code, seeks bail as his application seeking bail has been turned down by the Sessions Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by {2} Cri. Application No.3832/2011 learned APP for respondent State. Perused the papers of investigation. 3. It appears that on 19.04.2010, an offence was registered at Crime No.35/2010 with Akole police station for an offence punishable u/s 326 and 323 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The said compliant was lodged by one Sagar alleging assault on his brother Vishal by the applicant and others. It is alleged in the complaint that while the victim was at the house of the applicant, to tease the wife of the applicant at about 3.00 am, he was assaulted by the accused persons. The complaint further discloses that earlier also Vishal was warned by the applicant not to indulge into the activities of molestation of his wife. Record shows that an offence of rape on the wife of the applicant was registered against said Vishal. It further appears that initially, this Court had granted bail to the applicant on 22.07.2010. It further appears that on 23.02.2011, i.e. after about 10 months of the alleged incident, Vishal expired while under treatment and hence an offence punishable u/s 302 has been added against the accused persons. Thereafter, supplementary statements of the {3} Cri. Application No.3832/2011 witnesses were recorded so also supplementary charge sheet came to be filed on 07.04.2011. It also appears that during mean time, the accused had surrendered before the trial court and the applicant had moved application seeking bail, which came to be rejected on 25.08.2011. It is informed that the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions, Sangamner. 4. It appears that the Sessions Judge has rejected bail to the applicant on the ground that the offence alleged against the applicant is punishable with death or life imprisonment. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant urged that when the applicant was released on bail earlier, by this Court, he has not misused the liberty. Nor had he tampered with the prosecution witnesses. It is further urged that the death of Vishal is not instantaneous, however, he expired after a span of 10 months while undergoing prolonged medical treatment. It is also urged that considering the fact that the death is not instantaneous, no intention or knowledge can be attributed to the applicant. Hence, it is prayed to release the applicant on bail. {4} Cri. Application No.3832/2011 6. Per contra, learned APP opposed the bail application on the ground that the offence alleged against the applicant is serious one and it is punishable with capital punishment or with imprisonment for life. Learned APP has, however, placed the Postmortem report dated 24.02.2011, on record. 7. The Postmortem report indicates that there were bed soars on the person of the deceased. It further appears from the Postmortem report that the before Vishal expired, he had undergone surgery. The medical papers in respect of surgery performed on the deceased are not made available for my perusal. However, fact remains that the cause of death, as reflected in the Postmortem report is “death due to coma due to complications of head injury”. The question whether the said complications were due to surgical wounds or medical defect or the same are connected with the assault, which has taken place 10 months back, cannot be ascertained at this stage. However, fact remains that the death is not instantaneous and the complications aroused in the health of the deceased while under the prolonged medial {5} Cri. Application No.3832/2011 treatment. One more aspect required to be considered is that and even learned APP has very fairly stated that when earlier the applicant was released on bail, he has not misused the liberty. Even there are no allegations of tampering of prosecution witnesses. Considering the above discussion coupled with the fact that the death is not instantaneous, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail, however, on certain conditions. 8. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant be released on bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. The applicant is directed to attend the Akole police station on 15th day of each month between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. without fail. Applicant is further directed not to contact or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B11/criapln3832-11