{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2190 OF 2010 Sanil s/o Suresh Patil Age-20 years, Occ-Education R/o Janta Part, Lane No.7 Navapur, Tq-Navapur Dist-Nandurbar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr. P.C.Patel, Advocate for the applicant Mrs.V.A.Shinde, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 19 th July 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present criminal application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.11/2010 registered with Navapur police station, Dist-Nandurbar for an offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code, as the applicant is in jail since 04.02.2010. It is informed that, in this offence, after completion of the investigation charge sheet was filed on 26.04.2010 before learned JMFC, Navapur and on the same day {2} the trial was committed to the Court of Sessions, Nandurbar and numbered as Sessions Case No.14/2010. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation as now the investigation is over. 3. It appears that the applicant is a student of second year D.Ed. and is the next door neighbour of the complainant. Perusal of the complaint discloses that the alleged incident has occurred on 28 th January 2010 between 10.30 am and 12.30 p.m. It is alleged that the complainant, when returned to his house at 12.30 p.m., noticed that his daughter was lying on the ground and hence he rushed her to the hospital where she declared dead. It is transpired that the death of the deceased caused due to strangulation and about 7 bruises / abrasion marks were noticed on the person of the deceased. It appears that initially offence was registered against one carpenter on suspicion and hence he was taken in custody, however during the investigation nothing incriminating was transpired against him. Thereafter on 4th February 2010, on suspicion, the applicant came to be arrested. It appears that during the course of investigation statements of teaching staff and the students from the college where the applicant is prosecuting studies appears to be recorded. Considering the investigation it appears that the entire case of the prosecution rests on circumstances. Statements of some of the {3} witnesses recorded during the investigation, indicate that the applicant was seen in the college at 11.00 a.m. It appears from the statement of the friend of the applicant that after the roll call, the applicant was not present in the college, however, returned after about 35-50 minutes. The circumstance against the applicant is that he is habitual of chewing Ghutka, consuming liquor and he is living a lavish life and has borrowed Rs.5000/- from his friend and was also to pay Rs.2000/- towards bill of mobile recharge. It is also tried to contend that considering the family background of the applicant though it is assumed that he is addicted to some bad habits, yet that would not lead to draw any inference that the applicant is involved in the said offence. In respect of finding of finger prints of the applicant on the mirror in the house of the complainant, it is contended pointing out the supplementary statement of the complainant and his wife that there was access to the applicant in the house of the complainant as he is next door neighbour and it is stated that 3/4 days before the alleged incident, the applicant had been to the house of the complainant. 4. Considering these facts, possibility of finding of the finger prints of the applicant as chance finger print cannot be ruled out. Considering the fact that the case of the prosecution rests on circumstances and now the investigation is over, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail. 5. In the result, application is allowed. The applicant be {4} enlarged on bail on his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- and one executing PR bond in the like amount. The applicant is prohibited from entering Janta park, Navapura till the trial against him is disposed of. It is made clear that violation of this condition would entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2190-10