1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.657 OF 2010 Suresh S/o.Mahadu Choudhari, Age-43 years, Occu-Agriculture and social worker, R/o.Pohari (Bk.) Taluka Soygaon, Dist. Aurangabad APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station, Soygaon, Dist. Aurangabad RESPONDENT Mr.A.N.Kakade, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 22/02/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on bail in connection with CR No.67/2009, registered in Soygaon Police Station of Dist. Aurangabad, for the alleged offence initially registered u/s. 323, 324, 504 r/w. 34 of IPC, and later on converted u/s. 302 of The IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for the State. 2 3. It appears that due to diversion of drainage water, quarrel took place between the 2 neighbourers i.e. the present applicant and his family and Pandit Bandu Kachole, the deceased and his family. During this quarrel, there was a fight between two groups in which the offence came to be registered against the present applicant vide CR No.67/2009 and by the applicant against the deceased and others vide CR No.66/2009. This incident took place in the early hours at 8.30 a.m. As they are neighbourers, there shall not be any mistaken identity about the applicant and the role played by the applicant during the said incident. 4. During the said incident, said Pandit Bandu sustained 4 injuries due to assault at the hands of present applicant. He succumb to death on 29/12/2009, while under treatment. Hence the offence was converted u/s. 302 of The IPC. It appears that after this offence was converted u/s. 302 of The IPC, applicant and others filed anticipatory bail application before this Court bearing Cri.Appl. No.84/2010, which was decided on 19/01/2010. At the time of hearing of that application, application on behalf of the present applicant was not pressed, hence stands rejected, but the application against others 2 Bebabai and Shailendra was allowed. In view of that order, it appears that on 27/01/2010, the applicant surrendered before the police station. Thereafter, the stick which was used during the said assault and fight, was recovered at the instance of present applicant. 3 5. During the course of submissions across the bar, two points are urged : 1) That considering the nature of injures found on the person of deceased Pandit, the act of the present applicant was not an intentional act to commit the murder of deceased, it may be that to cause the physical injury to the deceased. Secondly that considering the facts and circumstances, even though the investigation is yet to be completed, the applicant be released on bail. 6. While opposing the bail application, it is urged by the prosecution that there are complaints received in the police station that the present applicant or on behalf of the applicant, threats are given to the witnesses. In the premise and considering that earlier also, the applicant was convicted in one of the case, his bail application be rejected. 7. In the light of these submissions, perused the post mortem report, in which probable cause of death of deceased is reserved. On perusal of coloumn no.17 of the post mortem notes, it shows that the deceased has sustained 4 external injuries on his person, but none of these injuries are on the vital organs of the deceased which indicate that even though the victim deceased was assaulted by the applicant, it can not be said that it was an intentional assault on the part of applicant to commit the murder of deceased, and if it is so, as now the applicant is behind bars for more than 30 days, he is entitled for bail but on certain stringent conditions. Hence order : 4 O R D E R 1. Application is hereby allowed. 2. Applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 3. After released on bail, till disposal of the trial, applicant not to enter village Pohari (Bk.), Tal.Soygaon, Dist. Aurangabad, but the applicant is at liberty to apply the Court of Sessions to whom the said session trial will be assigned, for relaxation of this condition after the commencement of trial, if so advised. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/FEB 2010/cri.appl.657-10