1 BA-1848-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURTE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1848 OF 2011 mhi Shri Pawan Rajkumar Drolia ... Applicant ... vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Shri Shirish Gupte, Senior Counsel, i/b. Sharmil Kaushik, Advocate for the applicant. Smt. R.V.Newton, APP, for the respondent-State. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 16th December,2011. P.C. 1. The applicant seeks to be released on bail in Crime No.36/2003 registered with Kasara Police Station under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 3.7.2003, one Laxman Khamkar of Mandavkar Kond Taluka Mahad lodged a missing report at the Police Station. As per the report, his brother Shatrughan had come to the village on 1.7.2003 and stayed overnight. On 2.7.2003, a Maruti Car bearing No.MH-04-3881 had come to the village and three persons had come by that car. They had lifted Shatrughan, put in the car and escaped. Thereafter, he did not hear 2 BA-1848-11.sxw anything about Shatrughan. On 5.7.2003, the police found the dead body of a male person wrapped in a piece of cloth and tied with the plastic rope in Kasara Ghat. Post-mortem report reveals that death had occurred due to strangulation and it was homicidal death. Therefore, the offence was registered against unknown persons. It appears that police could not find out how and by whom the murder was committed and the case appears to have been closed. In August 2011,i.e. almost eight years after the incident, certain facts came out and the case was reopened. During the investigation, it was revealed that deceased Shatrughan was working as a Cleaner on a Tempo of Orsan Chemicals Pvt.Ltd. company at Wada. Imran Abdul Gani Sayyed was driver of that tempo. One Sikander was also working with the said company. It was revealed that amount of Rs.25,000/- was given by Narayan Goenka, one of the owners of the company to his Manager and that amount was stolen away by deceased Shatrughan. Initially, the employer suspected that Imran and Sikander must have committed theft, but they denied it and as Shatrughan was missing, Narayan Goenka asked Imran and Sikander to bring Shatrughan from his village and accordingly he provided his Omni Car. As per the statement made by Imran before the police, he and his friends Mohammed Kais, Sameer, Irfan went to Mandavkar Kond Village in Mahad Taluka and brought Shatrughan to the company. The present applicant Pawan is one of the owners of the company. At the instance of Narayan and Pawan, Imran and 3 BA-1848-11.sxw Sikander took said Shatrughan to the factory premises at Wada and confined him in the godown of the company. According to his statement before the police, Shatrughan had committed suicide and, therefore, at the instance of Narayan, he himself, applicant Pawan and four other persons i.e. Kamal, Mahendra, John and Sikander tied the dead body in a pink coloured plastic cloth and took him in Car No NG-04-AG-6522 and thereafter Imran, John and Sikander threw the dead body in Kasara Ghat. Later on, he showed the spot where the dead body was thrown. Almost a similar statement was made before the police by another co- accused Mahendra Dagdu, who was also involved in disposal of the dead body. 3. The statement of Imran and Mahendra, both of whom are accused in the case, is possibly hit under Sec. 25 of the Evidence Act. Their statement that deceased Shatrughan had committed suicide when he was confined in the godown is inconsistent with the post-mortem report which indicates that he was murdered. However, except the statement of these two persons to show that he was confined in the godown at the instance of the present applicant and then the dead body was wrapped by five persons, including the present applicant, there is no other material. 4. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant contends that even if the 4 BA-1848-11.sxw statements of these two persons are taken at their face value, still role of the present applicant was confined to the disposal of the dead body, which is an offence punishable under Section 201 of IPC. It will not be appropriate to make any comment on this aspect at this stage, because as per that statement, Shatraghun was confined in the godown as per the direction given by Narayan and present applicant Pawan and it appears that thereafter he was murdered, but to support this statement of Imran and Mahendra, there is no other material. 5. Therefore, the applicant be released on his executing P.R. of Rs. 50,000/- with two solvent sureties to make up the amount with condition that he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall also attend Kasara Police Station on first Monday of every month till end of the trial. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)