1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application [ABA] No. 246 of 2011 (Ramrao S/o. Yeshwantrao Chavan Vs. State of Maharashtra) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. D.V. Chauhan, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. D.B. Patel, APP for the State/non-applicant. CORAM : M. N. GILANI, J. DATE : 29 th JULY, 2011. Heard both sides. The applicant Ramrao has two sons namely Bhagwantrao and Vishwasrao. The applicant was owner of about 100 acres of land, which was partitioned between both the brothers. 11 acres of land came to the share of Ramrao. Both the brothers were disputing about sharing of water of the well. On 23/05/2011, the applicant had gone to the field with a mechanic. Gajanan and his father Vishwasrao objected about entry of the applicant in the field. Bhagwantrao also arrived there. There was a quarrel between both the brothers. Both were possessing revolvers. There was exchange of fire and in that Vishwasrao died. Bhagwantrao sustained three bullet injuries. The mechanic, who was carried by the applicant, also sustained bullet 2 injury. Vishwasrao died because of the bullet injuries on the chest and stomach and Gajanan sustained injuries on his hand and cheek. Here the Court is concerned with the role played by Ramrao. Crime Nos. 28/2011 and 29/2011 have been registered with Police Station Pophali. The applicant is an eye-witness in Crime No. 29/2011. Perused the statement of Gajanan, who is a son of Vishwasrao and was also injured at the time of incident. In the statement of Gajanan, recorded while he was in the hospital, he did not make mention about the presence of the applicant. Even, other witnesses state that the applicant had come to the field with a lineman. After Gajanan objected, Bhagwantrao and Vishwasrao came there. Then there started exchange of words between both the brothers, which ultimately culminated into firing at each other. The applicant is a witness in Crime No. 29/2011 and his statement has been recorded. It appears from his statement that the dispute between both the brothers about sharing of water of the well was going on since long and all the times he used to pacify them. After going through the case-diaries in both the crimes, although it appears that the applicant was present at the time of incident, he had no connection with the offence 3 bearing Crime No. 28/2011, for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. He is an old person aged about 80 years. It seems that in the incident, where two brothers fired at each other, out of them one lost his life whereas another sustained serious injuries, the father-applicant has been involved only on the ground of his presence on the spot. In that light of the matter, the application is allowed in the following terms. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Ramrao Chavan in Crime No. 28/2011, he be released on his furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties in the like amount. The applicant is directed to attend the Police Station Pophali, once in a week preferably on Monday, in between 10:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m., till filing of charge-sheet or for a period of two months, whichever occurs earlier. Hamdast allowed. JUDGE *sdw