1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application (BA) No. 444/2011 Kailash Ranuji Gaikwad ..Vs.. State of Maharashtra through P.S.O. P.S. Washim Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. CORAM : U.V. BAKRE, J. DATED : 26.9.2011. 1. Heard Mr. A. S. Mardikar, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Mr. N. R. Rode, learned A.P.P. for the non-applicant. 2. The applicant, who has been arrested on 02/08/2009, in Crime No. 256/09 registered by the Washim Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, has filed this application for bail. 3. One Ravi Gangaram Jadhav has filed the oral report dated 01/08/2009 against altogether 9 accused persons including the present applicant alleging that the incident occurred on account of previous enmity over agricultural property, on account of which a civil proceeding is pending in the Court. The allegation is that on 01/08/2009, while returning from Washim after attending the Court matter, said Ravi Jadhav and his father Satish Jadhav (deceased) were accosted by the applicant and other accused persons near Wangi toll naka, chilli powder was thrown at them due to which they fell down along with their motorcycle and the present applicant and Pralhad instigated all other accused to assault 2 Satish Jadhav. All the accused assaulted Satish as a result of which he died. It is alleged that the present applicant was armed with sickle and he attacked with the same on the neck of the deceased. As per the reply filed by the respondent, the offence has been registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 201 and 342 of I.P.C. 4. The respondent has opposed the application on the ground that if the present applicant is released on bail, he may tamper with the evidence and pressurize the witnesses and that there is prima facie evidence against him. 5. The remaining eight co-accused in the present Crime are on bail due to which the fear of tampering with the evidence bears no substance. 6. The present applicant had earlier filed Criminal Application (BA) No. 76/2011, in which by order dated 22/02/2011, the learned Sessions Judge seized with the sessions case pertaining to the present crime was directed to make best endeavor to commence and conclude the trial by the end of June 2011, and leave was granted to the present applicant to withdraw the application with liberty to renew the prayer for bail in the event of the trial being not concluded by the end of June, 2011. A status report was called from the learned Sessions Judge who is seized of the said case and he has sent the same alleging that the accused persons themselves are delaying the steps of framing of charge in the matter probably with a view to see that the present applicant gets bail. 7. Be that as it may, the fact remains that trial has not yet commenced and since there are total 9 accused persons including the present applicant, the completion of trial may take long time. Considering that all the other co-accused have already 3 been released on bail and since there is no fear that the present applicant would flee from justice, I am of the view that he is entitled to be released on bail. 8. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No. 256/09 registered at Washim Police Station, on execution of personal recognition bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount under condition that: (i) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and; (ii) he shall not contact the prosecution witnesses and pressurize them. Application stands disposed of in the above terms. JUDGE Punde.