[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.2277 OF 2008 Sunil Sakaram Pawar ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.Vikas Shivarkar Advocate for Applicant Mr.H.J.Dedia APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : AUGUST 13, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 13, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 13, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in CR No.300 of 2007 of Dehu Road Police Station, Pune. The said case is mainly under Section 302 r.w. 34 of IPC. 3. The applicant is the brother of the deceased Raju. It is the prosecution case that as Rupali was not treated properly by Raju hence, the applicant along with other accused assaulted him and caused injury. [-2-] 4. The complainant has stated that on 1.11.2007, there was dispute between Raju and the applicant with relation to Rupali. Rupali told the complainant that as there was quarrel between husband and wife in the afternoon, hence, the applicant along with one Umdeo had beaten Raju. Thereafter, Sunil and Umdeo took Raju to the Doctor to treat him. At about 9 p.m. they returned. On the complainant asking the applicant as to why he had beaten Raju, applicant assaulted complainant with one cable wire which was in his hand. At that time, the applicant also threatened complainant that he would finish the complainant as well as his son Raju. Thereafter, the applicant and others again started assaulting Raju. The complainant intervened and separated the quarrel. The complainant had also requested that Raju be taken to the Doctor. 5. On the next day in the morning at about 8.30 a.m. the applicant along with co-accused Umdeo told complainant that they would take Raju to the Doctor. Both of them took Raju on their motorcycle and left. At about 10 a.m. the applicant and Umdeo informed Manisha who is the daughter of the [-3-] complainant, that Raju had expired and they had kept his dead body in the hospital. The material on record shows that the applicant had the motive to commit murder of Raju, the cable wire with which the applicant assaulted complainant as well as deceased Raju, has been recovered at his instance. The injuries on the complainant and Raju are consistent with assault by cable wire. There is sufficient material which connects the applicant with the crime, hence, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant bail. 6. Application is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]