MP 1 BA1649_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1649 OF 2011 1. Uttam Kashinath Gaikwad 2. Santosh Uttam Gaikwad ... Applicants Versus State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Avinash Kamkhedkar, Advocate for Applicants. Smt. R.V.Newton, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM : J. H. BHATIA, J. DATE : 28TH NOVEMBER 2011 P. C. : The applicants seek to be released on bail in crime No.92 of 2008 registered with Malegaon Taluka Police Station, District Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 396, 397 r/w. Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The F.I.R. was lodged on 14.04.2008 by one Shashikala Ramraj Pandey. As per the F.I.R., during the night at about 1.30 a.m., ten to twelve persons committed dacoity at the house of Shashikala after causing injuries with sticks. They had taken away a mangalsutra and earrings of her daughter-in-law and cash of Rs.2,50,000/- from the cupboard. Total value of property, including cash which was taken away, was Rs.3,45,000/-. The same culprits had also committed similar offence at the house of one teacher. The offence was registered against unknown persons. The applicants were later on arrested. According to the prosecution, Applicant No.1 Uttam was identified by three witnesses namely Ramraj Pandey, Subhash Thakare and Shashikant Thakare during the test identification parade. Applicant No.2 Santosh, who is son of applicant No.1 Uttam, was allegedly identified during the test identification MP 2 BA1649_11 parade held on 02.07.2010 by three witnesses namely Ramraj Pandey, Manoj Pandey and Subhash Thakare. 3. Admittedly, the test identification parade for applicant No.1 Uttam was held twenty months after the incident. While for applicant No.2 Santosh, the test identification parade was held more than two years after the incident. The incident had occurred within few minutes during the night at about 01.30 a.m. Admittedly, no stolen property was recovered from any of the applicants. 4. The learned Counsel for the applicants contends that in the same case, Malegaon police had arrested one Sarjerao Jadhav and he was killed in police custody for which crime No.65 of 2010 was registered by C.I.D. Aurangabad against fourteen police officers of Malegaon Police Station. According to him because of that reason, Malegaon police have falsely implicated some of the persons in the dacoity case. It will not be desirable to make any comment as to the circumstances in which the applicants were implicated. However, the fact remains that there is no recovery of any stolen property from them and that they were identified during the test identification parade after a long period. 5. Therefore, both the applicants be released on their executing P.R. of Rs.25,000/- each with one or two sureties in like amount with condition that they shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (J. H. BHATIA, J)