1 Cri.A.5572.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5572 OF 2011 Ramu @ Roshan Ashok Deore, Age 23 Years,Occup.: Business, R/o Umrane, Tq. Deola, District Nashik. ...APPLICANT. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, ...RESPONDENT. ... Shri.Joydeep Chatterji, Advocate for Applicant. Shri.D.R.Kale, A.P.P. for Respondent-State. ... CORAM: R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 17.12.2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for both the sides. 2. Issue Notice to the respondent-State. Learned APP waives service of notice. 3. Learned Advocate Mr. Chatterji submitted that since Court had an occasion to go through the charge-sheet filed by co-accused, in Criminal Application NO. 5251 of 2011, the matter be taken 2 Cri.A.5572.11 up for hearing. Mr. Kale, learned APP had no objection for the same as copy of the charge-sheet is with him. Both the advocates expressed their willingness to go on with the matter. 4. The applicant is arrested in connection with Crime No. 64 of 2011, registered with Mohadi Police Station, Dhule, District Dhule under sections 302, 201 120-B, and 404 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The incident depicts that the deceased Dharmesh, father of Harish had gone to Umrane in connection with his cloth business and in the evening on 7th June, 2011, as per information provided by co-accused Mr.Jadhav before lodgment of the FIR to Harish, Arun Jadhav, Tushar Borse had seen off the deceased Dharmesh at Umrane Bus Station. Thereafter, the said Darmesh would not found alive and thereafter his body was found at Laling. 5. Mr. Chatterji, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that apart from 3 Cri.A.5572.11 allegations surfaced from the charge-sheet namely present applicant, Arun Jadhav, Raj Devre, Tushar Borse had taken food in the Hotel at Rajmudra Hotel, in the evening of 7th June, 2011, there is no material to link the present applicant with alleged crime. According to the learned advocate for the applicant, even if it is the case of the prosecution that present applicant was found in the company of deceased Dharmesh in the evening of 7th June, 2011 at Rajmundra Hotel, that by itself is weak circumstance and the said circumstance is not sufficient to allege that present applicant was responsible for the death of said Dharmesh. Learned Advocate for applicant, therefore, submitted that present applicant is entitled to bail. 6. Mr. Kale, learned APP opposed the submission by contending that circumstance placed against applicant has to be considered for the purpose of rejection of bail. Learned APP, therefore, opposed for grant of bail to the applicant. 4 Cri.A.5572.11 7. After having gone through the entire record and even if it is accepted that the applicant was in the company of the deceased in the evening of 7th June, 2011, at Rajmudra Hotel, that by itself is not sufficient to link him with alleged crime. In my view, the present applicant is entitled to bail. Hence, following order is passed. (i) The application is granted. (ii) It is hereby ordered that applicant be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 64 of 2011, registered with Mohadi Police Station, Dhule, District Dhule in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one surety in the like amount. The applicant shall execute P.R. bond of sum of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand). (ii) Upon release, the applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station on every Second Saturday between 11.00 a.m. to 4.00 5 Cri.A.5572.11 p.m. till evidence of material witnesses on behalf of the prosecution is recorded. . The Criminal Application stands disposed of in the above terms accordingly. Sd/- [ R.Y.GANOO, J. ] MTK