IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2794 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2794 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2794 OF 2007 Mr.Balu @ Kaluram Ramdas Bahirat. ... Applicant. V/s. State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent. Shirish Gupte, senior counsel i/b. Subhas Hulyalkar and Vishwajeet Patil for the applicant. S.S.Pednekar, APP for the State. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 3rd September 2007. DATED: 3rd September 2007. DATED: 3rd September 2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: ---- ---- ---- . Heard learned senior counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. This is an application under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking bail in connection with CR.No.170/2007 registered with Chaturshringi Police Station, Pune for the offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.). 3. The applicant came to be arrested on 2nd April, 2002. Chargesheet came to be filed against him on 30th June, 2007. The applicant approached Sessions Court, Pune for grant of bail by moving Criminal Misc. Application No.2155/2007. The said application came to be rejected vide order dated 8th August, 2007 The applicant has, therefore, invoked jurisdiction of this Court to seek bail. 4. Mr.Gupte, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant contends that there was no intention on the part of the accused to cause death of his brother. He further contends that the single blow which resulted in death of the victim, who is no one other than his real brother. He submits that even if it is presumed that the applicant had knowledge that his act would cause death, but that itself would not constitute an act of committing offence under section 302 of I.P.C. He sought to rely upon some of the judgment of the Apex Court, in the case of Laxman Kalu Laxman Kalu Laxman Kalu v. State of Maharashtra v. State of Maharashtra v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1968 SC 1390; Begdi Ram Begdi Ram Begdi Ram v. State of Maharashtra v. State of Maharashtra v. State of Maharashtra, 2004 Cri.L.J. 632; Tholan Tholan Tholan v. State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1984 SC (Cri.) 164; and S.K.Gore v. State of Maharashtra S.K.Gore v. State of Maharashtra S.K.Gore v. State of Maharashtra, 1995 CRI.L.J. 93. 5. The learned A.P.P., appearing for the State, opposed this application for bail contending that the weapon like axe was used, which was witnessed by an independent witness. He, thus, prayed for rejection of this bail application. 6. Having heard rival parties, the applicant- accused is a real brother of the deceased, who had notorious past record of heavy drinking and assaulting his family members including aged members of the family such as his mother and grand mother. The death has occurred due to single blow. There are no criminal antecedents against applicant- accused. The investigation is complete. Chargesheet has already been filed. In these circumstances, looking to the nature of circumstances and relationship of the applicant- accused with the deceased, I am inclined to grant bail in favour of the applicant, subject to the following conditions: (a) The applicant, arrested in connection with C.R.No.170/2007 registered with Chaturshringi Police Station, Pune shall be enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. (b) The applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station once in a week, i.e. on every Friday between 3.00 to 5.00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial. (c) The order of bail will be given effect only after the applicant furnishes to the investigating officer the details about his place of residence and address where he proposes to stay after he is enlarged on bail. The applicant will not change his residential address thereafter till the conclusion of trial without prior intimation to the investigating officer. (d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement or threat or pressurise any prosecution witnesses and shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence. (e) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigating agency for disposal of the case. It is needless to mention that breach of any of the conditions by the applicant shall result in cancellation of bail. (f) Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as finding or expression on merits of the case at the time of trial. 7. Application stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE