1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4172 OF 2009 Baliram @ Bandu S/o.Keshav Malhare, APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through the Police Station RESPONDENT Mr.S.B.Ghatol Patil, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned counsel for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 10/12/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on bail in connection with CR No.95/2009, registered in Basmath Police Station, for an offence punishable u/s. 302, 201 of IPC in which after completion of investigation, charge sheet is filed in the Court of Law. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. Also perused the papers of investigation as they are produced before me for my perusal. 2 3. According to learned counsel appearing for the applicant that this offence came to be registered on the basis of complaint lodged by father of deceased Balaji on 06/06/2009 about the incident occurred on 05/06/2009. According to the allegations in the complaint, deceased Balaji, son of the complainant was residing with complainant. In the night of 05/06/2009, he received phone call on his cell phone and he went outside while he was talking with the caller on that mobile phone. During that night, Balaji did not returned. On the next day, Balaji was searched by the complainant and his relatives, but unable to trace out. The complainant further states that he received information from one Suresh Sarode that the dead body of Balaji is lying in one dry canal. To verify the fact, the complainant went at the spot and confirmed that the dead body of which head was found in banged condition, is of his son. His further statement appeared to be recorded on 08/06/2009 wherein on suspicion, name of present applicant was taken and on 09/06/2009, the present applicant is taken in custody and since then he is in custody. 4. According to learned counsel appearing for the applicant that on mere suspicion, he is arrested in this case and there is neither circumstantial evidence nor any direct evidence to connect him with this offence, hence he be released on bail. 5. As against this, according to learned APP appearing for State, in the night of 05/06/2009, the applicant was seen in the company 3 of deceased Balaji and the co-accused, who have taken meal from one Dhaba at around 8.00 p.m. Statement of waiter working in that dhaba was recorded during the investigation, who have given the name of present applicant who found in the company of deceased alongwith co-accused. According to learned APP, apart from it, the post mortem notes shows that semi digested food was found in the large intestine of the deceased. Apart from it, the stone with which the head of the deceased was banged, was recovered at the instance of the present applicant. The incident took place in the field of present applicant, where the blood was found covered with plain soil to conceal the incident took place in the field of the applicant. In the premise, according to learned APP this is not a case to release the applicant on bail. 6. Considering these submissions across the bar, first it is necessary to peruse the notes of post mortem. Particulars in the notes of post mortem mentioned in coloumn no.21 about the contents found in the stomach, small intestine as well as large intestine. Semi digested food was found in the stomach which goes to show that soon before the death of deceased, the deceased might have taken meals within the span of 2 ½ to 3 hours. It is to be read in connection with the statement of waiter serving on dhaba, which discloses that the applicant, co-accused and deceased have taken food on the dhaba These circumstances goes to show that in the night of incident, this applicant was seen together taking meal alongwith the deceased as well as with co-accused. The 4 circumstance can not be said to be a co-incident that the head of the deceased was banged in the field of applicant and the blood found on the soil was attempted to be covered with the plain soil. The stone which is used to bang the head of the deceased was recovered at the instance of this applicant. If these are the circumstances to be linked together, it can not be said that the applicant is arrested on mere suspicion without any evidence against him. On the contrary, these are the circumstances which clearly indicate and point out the guilt of the accused connecting him with murder of the deceased. In the premise, no case made out to enlarge the applicant accused on bail. Hence the application stands rejected. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/DEC 2009/cri.appl.4172-09