1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3833 OF 2009 Dnyandeo @ Dnyanoba S/o.Shivaji Kapure, Age-27 years, Occu-Agriculturist, R/o.Pangra Dhone, Tq. Purna, Dist. Parbhani APPLICANT VERSUS State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Police Station, Purna, Tq.Purna, Dist.Parbhani RESPONDENT Mr.S.S.Rathi, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned counsel for respondent. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 05/12/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on bail in connection with CR No.109/2009, registered in Purna Police Station of Dist. Parbhani in connection with offence punisahble u/s. 302 r/w. 34 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. Also perused the papers of investigation as already the investigation is over and 2 charge sheet is filed against this applicant in the competent Court of Law. 3. From the submissions across the bar, it appears that the alleged offence was registered in Purna Police Station about the incident occurred on 30/06/2009 at about 11.00 a.m. in front of bus stand. The information about the murder of deceased Ankush was received to the complainant who is mother of deceased from one person by name Siddhodhan Pandurang Pandit which indicates that the complainant was informed that somebody has killed Ankush and Ankush is taken to the hospital. Accordingly the complainant visited the hospital where she found Ankush dead and on suspicion of complainant, complaint was lodged against the present applicant and Balu/the brother of present applicant. 4. The applicant came to be arrested on 30/06/2009, and till then he is in custody. It is urged across the bar that even though the alleged incident occurred in the broad day light around 11.00 a.m., there is not a single eye witness whose statement is recorded during the investigation which suggests that the applicants are the killers of deceased Ankush. One knife is recovered during the house search of this applicant, but that knife was also not recovered at the instance of applicant in connection with disclosure statement made by him, but during the routine search of his house after his arrest. There is no evidence according to the learned counsel for applicant against this applicant hence he be released on bail. 3 5. By drawing my attention to the post mortem report which indicates that there are total 22 injuries found on the person of the deceased. According to learned APP, this brutal act shows that in which way Ankush was murdered and due to that nobody is coming forward to give statement against this applicant. 6. Considering the post mortem notes, one fact is clear that the death of deceased is homicidal death. Even though it is vehemently urged across the bar that the post mortem notes shows that there are 22 injuries found on the person of the deceased and due to that nobody is coming forward to give statement against applicant that they are the authors of this act. By bearing in mind all these things, I have also require to consider that the incident occurred in the public place at 11.00 a.m. It is not the case of prosecution that this applicant is known as “Gunda” of that area and there are criminal anticidents to his credit and because of his terror, no one is coming forward to give the statement that this applicant is the author of those injures. Apart from it, no weapon is recovered at the hands or at the instance of this applicant or the applicant who is already released on bail. No CA report of connecting evidence is at least before this Court to connect these injuries which resulted in death of Anush and if it is so, merely because there are 22 injuries found on the person of deceased, in absence of any direct nexus, it is difficult to be held at this juncture that applicant is the author of these injuries resulted in death of deceased Ankush. As the applicant is in custody since 30/06/2009, the application deserves to be disposed of 4 by way of following order : O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. Applicant be released on bail on furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and on executing PR bond in the sum of like amount. 3. After released on bail, applicant not to enter in the jurisdiction of village Pangare Dhone, till the commencement of sessions trial against the applicant and other accused. 4. Application stands disposed of in terms of above order. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/DEC 2009/cri.appl.3833-09