1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 1850 of 2010 Rahul @ Mama Rewaram Bagade ..VERSUS.. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., P.S., Jaripatka, Nagpur. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. R.M.Daga, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S.M.Bhagde, A.P.P. for respondent/State. CORAM : Prasanna B. Varale, J. DATED : 13 th Decem ber , 2010 . Heard. By the present application, the applicant is seeking his release on bail in Crime No. 249/2010 registered with Police Station, Jaripatka for the offence punishable under Section 302, 34 of I.P.C. Mr. Daga, learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the report lodged in the present crime is an outcome of confessional statement of other accused namely Pappy @ Jitendra Gopichand Lalwani. Learned Advocate further submitted that as per prosecution story, the accused Pappy @ Jitendra Lalwani had a grudge in his mind against the victim Sunil Ingle as Sunil had committed murder of his brother and on 15/7/2010, Pappy @ Jitendra along with one Harjeet Singh Garewal and the applicant committed murder of Sunil Ingale. Learned Advocate further submitted that the applicant is falsely involved by the main accused Pappy @ Jitendra only because of jealousy and there is no material to connect the applicant with the present crime. Therefore, learned Advocate has prayed for releasing the applicant on bail. 2 Mr. Bhagde, learned APP for the State has opposed the application on the ground that there is strong material against the applicant. Learned APP has made available the material collected by the investigating agency. It is seen from the record that the applicant had approached the Sessions Court for grant of bail, but the learned Sessions Court has rejected the application on the ground that there is material i.e. (1) statements of witnesses and (2) recovery of blood stained clothes at the instance of the applicant. Perusal of the record shows that the statements of witnesses recorded by the investigating agency refers to main accused Jitendra @ Pappy. One Surendra Dongre has stated in his statement about the presence of accused Jitendra on the spot and running from the spot at about 10.30 p.m., but there is nothing in his statement about the presence of the applicant or any role played by him in the alleged crime. The other material, which is relied upon by the investigating agency is recovery of the blood stained clothes at the instance of the applicant. However, there is no corresponding material to connect the present applicant with the help of this material with the alleged crime for the reason that it is not the case that the applicant had actually participated either in the assault or the applicant had caught hold the victim so as to receive the blood stains on his clothes. The material collected by the investigating agency falls too short to connect the applicant in respect of his participation in the act. The applicant was arrested on 16/7/2010. It is not in dispute that the investigation is concluded by filing the final report and as such there is considerable merit in the submission of learned Advocate for the applicant that no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant behind the bars for indefinite period. In reply to the apprehension expressed by learned APP that the applicant may pressurize the witnesses, learned Advocate for the 3 applicant submitted that to show his bona fides, the applicant is ready to reside outside the Nagpur city and he will reside at Bhandara for a period of three months. In view of above, I am of the opinion that prima facie case is made out by the applicant. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount, on the following conditions : a] The applicant to cooperate with the investigating agency and attend the police station, Jaripatka, Nagpur as and when called by the police. b] The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor commit any act such as contacting the prosecution witnesses or pressurize them. c] The applicant to reside at Bhandara city for a period of three months from today and he should furnish his residential address and contact numbers such as phone/mobile numbers to the investigating agency. However, the applicant is permitted to enter Nagpur city to attend the trial court proceedings at Nagpur. d] The applicant shall not leave his place without prior intimation to the police station about his visit to other place. In case of breach of these conditions, the prosecution agency to take necessary steps in accordance with the provisions of law. JUDGE Diwale