1 Cri-A-5531-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5531 OF 2010 Faiyaz Tasleem Malik ... Applicant (Orig. accused No.1) Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.Amin Solkar,Advocate, for the applicant. Ms. P.H.Kantharia, APP, for the respondent - State. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 22nd December, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP. Perused the copies of the police papers which are filed along with the charge- sheet. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the present applicant was Electrical Contractor and he had electric godown in the Airish Building. Early in the morning of 28.6.2010, some workers including Shyam Tiwari had caught one unknown person,who had come to the building with intention to commit theft. They tied hands and body and beat him with kicks, fist blows, etc. At about 7 a.m. 2 Cri-A-5531-10.sxw one Sonu, tea vendor saw that one person was caught in the godown and the workers, who had tied the hands and legs of that person, were beating him. Said Sonu also informed the security guard Sitaram Tiwari at about 7.45 a.m. Later on, the said person was found dead. Post-mortem report reveals that he had suffered several injuries and he had died due to hemorrhage and shock due to head injuries and multiple contusions all over the body. Police Constable Prahlade Devre lodged the FIR on the basis of which the offence was registered. The time of offence is shown to be 5.30 a.m. on 28.6.2010. The FIR was registered against Shyam Tiwari and his r unknown companions. After investigation, the present applicant, who is an electrical contractor and at whose godown the incident had occurred, was arrested on 29.6.2010. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant contends that there is no material to connect the present applicant with the said incident. The learned APP tried to show that some witnesses have spoken about his presence at the time of incident. On perusal of the statement of different witnesses, particularly the statement of one Daljeet Singh Lamba and Bharat Patel, which are relied upon by the prosecution to show the involvement of the present applicant in the commission of offence, I do not find anything on the basis of which it could be said that the present applicant was present at the time of the incident. As per the 3 Cri-A-5531-10.sxw statement of Bharat Patel, at about 10 a.m. the present applicant had informed him "we have caught one thief while committing theft in our godown". At about 12 noon, said Bharat Patel went to the site and found that one person was lying dead with several injuries. Daljeet Singh also states that at about 11 a.m. one Dhannubhai, supervisor had informed him that one unknown person had tried to enter into the godown of the contractor Fayyaz Malik, that he was heavily drunk and was still lying there. At about 11.30 a.m. Daljeet Singh went there and found that the person was lying dead. On enquiry, the present applicant told him that he was caught by his workers Shyam Yadav, Chanda, Pandit and they had beaten him with stick and fist blows. 4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that this is a fit case to grant bail. 5. The applicant be released on his executing P.R. of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount with condition that he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, with further condition that he shall attend the Saki Naka Police station on every Monday between 9 to 10 a.m. till the trial is over. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)