1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application (APPA) No. 910 of 2010 in Criminal Appeal No. 646 of 2010. Ramrao Yeshwant Tayade and another vs. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., P.S. Dhad, Dist. Buldhana -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. Mr. N.B.Kalwaghe, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. T.A.Mirza, APP for the respondent/State. CORAM : Mrs. V.K.Tahilramani & Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. DATE : 18th March, 2011 Heard the learned counsel for the applicant/original accused no.3 and learned APP for the respondent/State. The applicant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code. The applicant is now seeking bail. The prosecution case is that accused no.1 Ramrao had purchased cattle from Sardarsingh (deceased) in the month of April and May, 2009, the purchase price was to be paid somewhere during the time of Diwali, however, thereafter, accused no.1 avoided to pay the money despite several reminders from Sardarsingh. Hence, on 20/12/2009 Sardarsingh went to the village of accused no.1 Ramrao. Thereafter, Sardarsingh did not return. Hence, his son P.W.1 Shersingh lodged missing report. The police along with Shersingh went to the village of the accused in order to search for his father. In the field of accused no.1, they noticed some debris 2 covered with thorns and stones, which looked suspicious. Hence, some earth was removed from the debris. As a foul smell emanated from under the earth, they dug further and found dead body of Sardarsingh. It is the case of prosecution that dead body was found in the field of the applicant, however, there is no material to show that the field indeed belonged to the applicant or accused no.1, as the record shows that the field belongs to one Sulochana. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no role attributed to accused no.3 as far as purchase of cattle by accused no.1 is concerned. It was accused no.1 Ramrao, who had to pay the money to the deceased and present applicant had no concern with the same. Prima facie we find some merit in the submission. The present case is based only on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has relied on recovery of blood stained clothes at the instance of the applicant. However, it is an admitted fact that the C.A. report relating to the said blood stained clothes shows that there were no blood stains on the said clothes. Thus, this circumstance is not of any help to the prosecution. Looking to all above facts, we are inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order : The sentence imposed on the applicant is suspended and the applicant be released on PR bond of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount. The applicant shall report to Dhad Police Station, Dist. Buldhana, once in fortnight till disposal of the appeal. Application is allowed in above terms. JUDGE JUDGE Diwale