{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2401OF 2010 Balasaheb s/o Rangnath Warkhade Age-50 years, Occ-Agriculture R/o Devlalli Pravara, Tq-Rahuri Dist-Ahmednagar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for the applicant Mrs. V.A.Shinde, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 5th July 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.69/2010 registered with Rahuri Police station, as the applicant is arrested on 5th March 2010 and since then he is in jail. It is informed that in this offence, after completion of the investigation, charge sheet has been field before JMFC, Rahuri on 20th May 2010 and numbered as RTC No.96/2010. {2} 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP. As the investigation is over, perused the papers of investigation. 3. It appears that villagers from Devlali, Tq-Rahuri had passed a resolution to the effect that they would not sale the fodder, which would be produced in the said village to outsiders. It also appears that son in law of the applicant had purchased certain fodder from the said village and was transporting the same outside the village on 2nd March 2010. It further appears that the tempo, which was carrying the fodder, was intercepted by the villagers and on intimation from the driver of the tempo, the applicant and his son in law had been at the spot of incident and some dispute took place there between them and the villagers. It also appears that thereafter the dispute was settled between themselves and all were dispersed from the spot. It appears that subsequently Dattatraya and Ashok reached there and enquired as to what had happened and assured the villagers that they would resolve the dispute, which was already resolved. It appears that, thereafter these two persons did not return to their village and hence in the late night the villagers went to the house of applicant to enquire about the whereabouts of the said persons, however, they found that the premises is locked. Consequently, on 3rd March 2010 compliant of missing of the two persons was lodged. Thereafter, dead bodies of these two persons found in water channel one after another. It appears that those persons were shot {3} by fire arms. Accordingly, FIR came to be lodged against the present applicant and 13 others. 4. It appears that during the investigation, one revolver is said to have been recovered at the instance of the son of the present applicant. It further appears that the injuries found on the person of the two deceased persons were caused due to gun shots fired from the said revolver. It also appears that during the investigation it was revealed that finance was provided by the present applicant to his son to purchase the said revolver prior to 1 and 1/2 year of the incident. Alleged charges against the present applicant and others are for an offence punishable u/s 301, 201, 114 of the Indian Penal Code with section 3 r/w 25 of the Indian Arms Act. Perusal of the papers of investigation does not disclose any overtact or actual participation of the present applicant, as the case of the prosecution rests on circumstances. The only incriminating circumstance against the applicant is his mere presence on 2nd March 2010 at the time of dispute. Obviously, this is a weak piece of evidence, though in the nature of incriminating circumstance about the incident prior to the date of death of two deceased. Considering the fact that now the investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed, there are no chances of tampering of evidence and interference with the investigation. In the premise, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail. 5. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant {4} be released on bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount, if not required in any other offence. The applicant is directed not to leave the local jurisdiction of the concerned police station, without previous permission in writing. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2401-10