1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1147 OF 2010 Harjitsing s/o Khushalsing Junni & anr. ... APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Ms Manjusha Nayan, Advocate for the applicants Shri S.G. Nandedkar, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... W I T H CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1303 OF 2010 Surmasing s/o Khushalsing Junni ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Ms Manjusha Nayan, Advocate for the applicant Shri S.G. Nandedkar, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATED : 12th April, 2010 PER COURT: 1. Heard Ms Manjusha Nayan, learned counsel for the applicants as well as heard Mr. S.G. Nandedkar, learned A.P.P. for 2 the respondent. 2. Both these applications preferred by the applicants arise out of the same crime i.e. C.R. No.105/2009, registered with Partur Police Station, District Jalna and, therefore, both the said applications are being decided by the common order. 3. These are the two applications preferred by the applicants herein seeking bail in connection with C.R. No. 105/2009, registered with Partur Police Station, District Jalna for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, since they were arrested therein on 28.12.2009 and they are under judicial custody presently. 4. It appears that, the offence has been registered on the complaint lodged by the complainant namely Rakhasing s/o Rajusing Junni on 10.11.2009, alleging that, on 8.11.2009 at about 6.00 p.m., his father namely Rajusing alone went out of the house informing that he was going for drinking tea, but did not return to the home till 10.00 p.m. of the said date. Hence, the complainant searched for his father towards Mahadeo Temple as well as in Partur city, but he was not found. The complainant also made enquiry about his father with the relatives on phone, but no whereabouts of his father were known. On 9.11.2009, the 3 complainant made enquiry with his aunt namely Poonam Kaur residing at Jalna as well as made enquiry with other relatives, but his whereabouts were not known. Hence, the complainant lodged complaint about missing of his father and continued search for him. On 10.11.2009, it was revealed that one dead body was lying in the well on a ground near Dagaduseth Saraf Dal Mill and, therefore, the complainant went there and found dead body of his father in the said well and hands and legs of the said dead body were tied and also there was wound on his chest. 5. Admittedly, the complaint has been lodged by the complainant against the unknown persons. Thereafter, supplementary statement of the complainant Rakhasing as well as his mother Babita Kaur came to be recorded on 25.12.2009 and 10.12.2009 respectively, wherein fingers have been raised against the applicants herein as the perpetrators of the crime. 6. During the course of investigation, statement of one Vikas Awalkar was recorded, who stated that the victim Rajusing was last seen in the company of co-accused Gokulsing Khushalsing on 8.11.2009 by him. 7. On perusal of the investigation papers and also considering the rival submissions, it is apparent that, the names of 4 the applicants are not figured in the complaint lodged by the complainant on 10.11.2009 whereas the supplementary statement of the complainant, which was recorded after one and a half month i.e. on 25.12.2009 as well as the supplementary statement of the mother of the complainant namely Babita Kaur recorded on 10.12.2009 apparently point out the fingers against the applicants herein. It is stated in the complainant's supplementary statement dated 25.12.2009 that his mental condition was not proper when complaint was lodged on 10.11.2009 as well as there was pressure from the people from the Mohalla and, therefore, although he knew the names of the culprits who murdered his father, he did not disclose the same in the complaint. It is stated that, there was danger and threat to his life and, therefore, he did not disclose the names of the applicants in the said complaint. However, the fact remains that the complaint has been lodged on 10.11.2009 against the unknown persons and the names of the applicants have not been disclosed therein. Moreover, it is also curious to note that the complainant and his mother Babita Kaur gave statements after the substantial period i.e. almost about one and a half month and one month respectively and raised the fingers against the applicants in the supplementary statements i.e. after lapse of substantial period and, therefore, concoction and implication of the applicants in the alleged crime cannot be ruled out apparently. 5 8. Besides that, statement of Vikas discloses that the deceased Rajusing was lastly seen in the company of co-accused Gokulsing on 8.11.2009 by him and he did not say that he saw the victim Rajusing in the company of the applicants herein. Apart from that, apparently, there is no cogent, convincing and incriminating evidence against the applicants herein to connect them in the alleged crime. It is also stated that the investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed and, therefore, there is no propriety in keeping the applicants in custody further more. 9. In the light of the aforesaid facts, I am of the view that the applicants have made out the case for grant of bail and, therefore, present applications deserve to be allowed, but imposing stringent conditions upon the applicants herein. 10. In the result, Criminal Application Nos.1147/2010 and 1303/2010 are allowed and it is directed that the applicants in both the said applications be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.105/2009, registered with Partur Police Station, District Jalna on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each and on executing P.R. bonds in the like by each of them, on following terms and conditions. i) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence and/or 6 influence upon the witnesses directly/ indirectly. ii) The applicants shall not leave the limits of District Jalna without seeking prior permission of the concerned Court till the conclusion of the trial. iii) The applicants shall attend the dates of the Sessions Case before the concerned Court regularly and punctually. 11. Needless to say that the above observations are prima facie in nature and shall not come in way of any Court while deciding the matter on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE) JUDGE fmp/cri1147.10