1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4926 OF 2010 Rajaram Shankar Patil and Anr. ...Applicants. v. The State ...Respondents. Mr. P.D.Dalvi, adv. For the Applicant. Ms A.T.Javeri, APP For the Respondent/State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : JANUARY 12, 2011. P.C. 1 Applicants are the accused in Crime No.4 of 2010 registered with Shahuwadi police station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148 and 149 of the IPC. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP. Perused police papers. 2 Prosecution case in brief is that the Deceased Rajaram had some dispute with his brother Rau Patil about land. According to the prosecution, due to fear of deceased Rajaram, his brother Rau was living at the house of his married daughter Shobha and son-in-law Rajaram Shankar Patil at village Penthakhale and from there he used to go to Malapude village for cultivation of his land. On 14.1.2010 at about 11.30 a.m. or so deceased Rajaram Patil was found lying unconscious 2 with injuries on his person. Two witnesses namely Krishna and Ashok saw Rajaram in injured condition and at the same time from the short distance from him, they saw Rau Patil, his daughter Shobha, son-in-law Rajaram Shankar Patil and Jyotiram and Pandurang, who are the sons accused of Rajaram Shankar Patil and Shobha. All these persons were leaving after throwing sticks in their hands and murmuring something while looking towards the injured Rajaram Patil. Information was given to Shantabai wife of deceased Rajaram. She lodged report with police on the same day. Rajaram was referred to the hospital where he was declared dead. Applicant no.1 before this Court is Rajaram Shankar Patil son-in-law of Rau and applicant no.2 is the son of applicant no.1. They were arrested on the next day alongwith other accused. Other three accused have been granted bail. 3 Police statements of several witnesses including Shantabai wife of deceased Rajaram shows that disputes were going on between the deceased Rajaram and his brother Rau for a long time about partition of the movable as well as immovable property and on that ground quarrels had also taken place previously. Even though there is no eye witness of the actual assault, there are atleast two witnesses, who had seen all the five accused persons near the deceased alongwith the sticks 3 and also saw them throwing sticks and murmuring in contempt while looking towards the deceased, who was lying unconscious at that time. This is material evidence against the accused persons. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur while rejecting application of these applicants noted that other three accused namely Rau, Shobha and Pandurang were released on bail earlier on the ground that Rau is a old person and senior citizen, Shobha is a woman and Pandurang is a student. Present two applicants cannot be compared with any of them. Therefore, question of parity will not arise. In view of the facts and circumstances, in my opinion, applicants cannot be granted bail. If the bail is granted there is every possibility that they may tamper the evidence. 4 Therefore, application stands rejected. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)