1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1/2011 (Sau. Vimalbai w/o Gurmukh Chavan .vrs. State of Maharashtra) AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2/2011 (Gurumukh Mohana Chavan and one .vrs. State of Maharashtra) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. Anil S. Mardikar, Advocate for the applicants, Mr. S.S. Doifode, APP for the non-applicants. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J DATED : JANUARY 31, 2011 Heard. By these applications, three members of Chavan family i.e. Sau. Vimalbai in Criminal Application No.1/2011, her husband Gurumukh and her son Nitin in Criminal Application No.2/2011, have prayed for bail in connection with Crime No.64/2010 registered on 29.9.2010 with Buldana (Rural) Police Station, District- Buldana for the offence punishable under section 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In nutshell, it is the case of the prosecution that deceased Kalpana had advanced a hand-loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- to Vimalbai about 7 to 8 months prior to the incident. She was insisting to return the same. It is the 2 prosecution case that for avoiding repayment of the same, applicants have murdered her. It is not in dispute that there is no eyewitness for the offence allegedly occurred and the prosecution case rests upon the circumstantial evidence. Learned APP has stated that circumstantial evidence against the applicants in the shape of themselves having motive to commit the crime for evading to repay the loan amount, themselves having threatened the deceased and thirdly deceased last seen alive with applicant Vimalabai at some distance away from the well from which her corpse was taken out. It is urged that the chappal of applicant no.1 was found nearby the said well. The aforesaid submissions were rightly repelled by the learned counsel for the applicants by stating that the circumstance in the nature of deceased being seen alive lastly in the company of applicant no.1 Vimalabai and/or that her chappal being found nearby the well are inconsequential in as much as initially crime was registered upon the dying declaration recorded by Vimalbai, who was herself found and taken out of the same well along with deceased by witness Darasingh. Learned counsel for the applicants further urged that at this interim stage merely because the police came to the conclusion that Prakash, who as per dying declaration of Vimalabai recorded by Executive Magistrate and upon which FIR was registered, is said to have pushed deceased and Vimalbai in the well, was not 3 found nearby well or in the village on the day of incident can be considered as circumstance against Vimalbai of having led the investigating agency to a wrong track. It was urged that Vimalbai herself being found and taken out of the same well takes away all the sting of the circumstance pointed from the prosecution material that deceased was last seen alive in company of Vimlabai prior to the incident at a place nearby the said well or chappal of Vimlabai was found at the said well. It was thus contended that the circumstances relied or pointed out by the prosecution by themselves being improbable leading to the sole conclusion of the applicants, they are entitled to be released on bail during pendency of the trial. The perusal of the materials in the chargesheet prima facie support the said submissions canvassed by the learned counsel for the applicants. Needless to add that no other circumstance was either pointed out by learned APP or seen in the material in the case diary perused having potential either alone or in conjunction with other circumstances leading to prima facie inference of guilt or involvement of the applicants in committing murder of the deceased. Needless to add that merely because deceased found in a well was having ante mortem injuries but no such injury was found on the person of Vimlabai cannot be said to be having a potential even prima facie of casting doubt about involvement of Vimlabai and the other applicants in the crime, the applicants have made out a case to be enlarged on bail. Hence the order : 4 The applicants are directed to be released on bail in connection with Crime No.64/2010 of Police Station, Buldana (Rural) upon each of them furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two separate solvent sureties in the like amount and subject to the conditions that the applicants - (i) shall not enter with the local limits of Palaskhed Naik village, (ii) shall attend the investigating officer in between 11.00 am to 2.00 pm on every Monday until further order, (iii) shall stay upon the address mentioned in the application and shall not leave the same without the permission of the trial court, (iv) shall not indulge in any activity of tampering prosecution evidence, (v) shall not commit any offence while on bail. Both the applications stand disposed of. Hamdast allowed. JUDGE Gulande