-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPLICATION NO.66 OF 2008 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1028 OF 2005 Kedar Mohanrao Chavan ..Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.Sanjeev Savant and S.M.Suryawanshi Advocate for Applicant Ms.A.A.Mane, Advocate for Respondent ... CORAM: S.B.MHASE AND CORAM: S.B.MHASE AND CORAM: S.B.MHASE AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATE : JANUARY 31, 2008 DATE : JANUARY 31, 2008 DATE : JANUARY 31, 2008 P.C. [PER V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J]: P.C. [PER V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J]: P.C. [PER V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J]: 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant-original accused No.1 has been convicted in Sessions Case No.268 of 2003 by the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Pune. By the judgment and order dated 31.3.2005 the applicant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. The applicant is now seeking bail. 3. In the present case, two murders have been committed i.e. murder of Kajal and her five year -2- old son Akshay. Original accused no.2 Amit Vitkar is the step son of Kajal and the present applicant is friend of Amit. Amit is the son from the first wife of Ashok Vitkar and deceased Kajal was the second wife of Ashok. Ashok and Kajal along with their son Ankush were residing separately from the first wife and Amit who was son from the first wife. There were strained relations between Amit and Kajal. There is sufficient evidence against the applicant. P.W.3 Ratnamala has stated in her evidence that on 17.4.2003 she saw the present applicant along with co-accused Amit in the house of deceased Kajal Vitkar. P.W.3 Ratnamala has also deposed that at about 2.30 a.m. she heard shouts of Akshay and shouts of deceased Kajal. Then she heard a sound of bike. In the morning on the next day, dead body of Kajal was found in the house itself. However, Akshay was not to be found. The dead body of Akshay was found four days after the incident i.e. on 20.4.2003. P.W.7 Sujata Mhaske has deposed that she woke up at about 4.00 a.m. At that time, applicant along with co-accused no.2 Amit Vitkar came to her house with a small boy. At that time, Amit told her that Akshay is the younger brother of -3- Kedar i.e. the present applicant and there was some family problem hence, Kedar and the small boy were required to stay for some time in her house and requested for permission to do so. Hence, she allowed Kedar i.e. the present applicant and deceased Akshay to stay infront of her house. After sometime, the present applicant left her house along with deceased Akshay. She has identified the boy to be Akshay from the photograph shown to her. 4. Besides the evidence of P.W.3 Ratnamala and P.W.7 Sujata, there is other evidence which implicates the present applicant. There is discovery of the dead body of Akshay as well as discovery of the clothes of deceased Akshay at the instance of the present applicant. The dead body of Akshay had been concealed below a stone at a place in Katraj Ghat near Pune. The applicant after making a Memorandum Statement, led the police to the said place and removed the stone and showed the body of Akshay and thus the body of Akshay came to be discovered. The dead body of Akshay was completely naked and various injuries were found on the body of Akshay. Thereafter as stated earlier the clothes of -4- deceased Akshay also came to be recovered at the instance of the present applicant. The said clothes had been concealed in a well. Besides this, there is discovery at the instance of the present applicant of his own blood stained clothes. Thus, there is sufficient material on record which clearly implicates the present applicant. Hence, we do not find that this is a fit case to grant bail. 5. Application is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [ S.B.MHASE, J.]