(1) CR.APP. 2220.2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2220 OF 2009 Parmeshwar Vishwanath Kshirsagar, Age : 21 years, Occu.: Agri., R/o Aljapur, Tq. Barshi, Dist. Solapur .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra, (Copy to be served on P.P. High Court of Bombay, at Aurangabad) .. Respondent Mr. V.V. Tamke, Advocate for the Applicant Smt. R.R. Mane, APP for the Respondent-State CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 7TH JULY, 2009 ORAL ORDER:- 1] The applicant is seeking bail in crime no. 115 of 2008 dated 12.12.2008 registered with Osmanabad Rural Police Station. The applicant and one more accused Awdhoot are charged under section 302, 201, 120-B r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. (2) CR.APP. 2220.2009 2] On 12.12.2008, the first informant, informed the Police that he had noticed a dead body of an unknown person lying in a ditch near his agriculture field. The Police arrived at the scene of the incident and after due formalities, they registered offence. Soon it was revealed that the dead body belonged to one Vishwanath. The applicant and the other accused were arrested. There is material on record to suggest that Awdhoot had grudge against Vishwanath because he suspected that Vishwanath had illicit relations with his aunt. Witness Anusaya said that she has a tea stall and on 6.12.2008, Vishwanath had come to her stall for a cup of tea in the evening hours. She said after he left her stall, the applicant and other accused Awdhoot came to her stall and asked her whether Vishwanath had come there. Anusaya answered in the affirmative and told them that Vishwanath had already left the stall. 3] Witness Datta is a Waiter in a restaurant. He said on 6.12.2008, at about 6:30 pm, the applicant and accused Awdhoot and one unknown person had come to his restaurant. He said they had liquor and dinner and thereafter they left. This witness unfortunately does not say that Vishwanath was the third unknown person. The third witness is one Vinod, who is a readymade clothes shopkeeper. (3) CR.APP. 2220.2009 He said that at about 12.00 midnight on 6th December, 2008 accused Awdhoot came to his house alongwith one unknown person. He said since he knew Awdhoot prior to that incident, he at the request of Awdhoot sold to Awdhoot some new clothes. He also said that he had noticed blood stains on Awdhoot’s clothes. 4] The question is whether this material is sufficient to deny the applicant bail. The answer is in the negative. The most important of the prosecution witness was witness Datta. His statement however, indicates that he did not know Awdhoot and the present applicant since prior to their visit to his restaurant. He did not get an opportunity to identify the applicant and accused Awdhoot in a properly arranged identification parade. He said he was shown the applicant and Awdhoot, while they were in Police custody and he identified them as persons who visited the restaurant. As said above, he did not mention that he knew Vishwanath and had identified him as the third person, who accompanied the applicant and Awdhoot to his restaurant. Witness Vinod’s statement is not implicating the present applicant because Vinod did not identify that the applicant had accompanied Awdhoot. The applicant deserves bail. (4) CR.APP. 2220.2009 5] The applicant is released on bail of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) with one surety in the like amount. 6] Criminal Application stands disposed of. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp/7july9/cr2220.09