1 Cri-A-5829-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5829 OF 2010 1. Sandeep Ramdas Banger ) 2. Raj Ramdas Banger ).. Applicants/accused Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondents Mr Edger BraganzaAdvocate, for the applicant. Ms. P.P.Shinde, APP, for the respondent - State. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 3rd February, 2011. P.C. 1. Applicant No.1 Sandeep and his brother applicant No.2 Raj seek to be released on bail in Crime No.341/2010 registered at Kashimira Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 201 of IPC and under the provisions of the Arms Act. 2. Heard. Perused the police papers filed along with the charge sheet. 3. The applicant No.1 Sandeep, applicant No.2 Raj, accused No.1 Santosh Rai and deceased Irshad Alam were in l service of one Anjum Patel. As per the FIR, on 28.12.2009 in the night, some dispute occurred about payment at 2 Cri-A-5829-10.sxw Night Meeting Bar about Chinese food between accused No.1 Santosh Rai and deceased Irshad Alam. At about mid-night, applicant No.1 Sandeep, one Deepak and Irshad went to the second floor of a building under construction to sleep. At that time, Irshad received a phone from accused No.1 Santosh Rai on which he threatened to kill him. Within 15 minutes thereafter, Santosh Rai came in front of the building and called Irshad. Therefore, Irshad, Deepak and Sandip went out and accused No.1 Santosh fired at Irshad thrice with his revolver due to which Irshad died. It appears that Deepak had run away when this incident occurred. After this, Sandeep contacted his employer Anjum Patel and informed him that Irshad was dead. As instructed by employer, Sandeep went to police station at about 1.45 a.m. and orally informed about the incident. Immediately he came back to the spot along with police, but the dead body was not found there and spot of incident appeared to have been washed. Accordingly, FIR lodged by applicant No.1 Sandeep was recorded at 12.20 hrs on 29.12.2009. Later on, it was revealed that the dead body was removed by one Pappu and Viru @ Sharookh. According to prosecution,as per the statement of one Noori, who is a girl friend of one Mukesh, Raj is also known as Pappu and therefore according to prosecution, the applicant No.2 Raj and Viru had removed the dead body. The dead body was recovered about two months after the incident on the basis of information given by Viru @ Sharookh. There are number of witnesses to show that Irshad was 3 Cri-A-5829-10.sxw killed by Santosh Rai. 4. Looking to the prosecution story, the learned APP was at pains to explain as to how the applicant No.1 Sandeep, who is the first informant, is made accused in this case. Even if it is believed that applicant No.2 Raj is the same person who is know as Pappu, and who had removed the dead body, the case against him will be only under Section 201 of IPC and not under sec. 302 IPC. Investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed. 5. In view of the above facts, the applicant No.1 Sandeep be released on his executing P.R. of Rs.5,000/- with a surety in the like amount. Applicant No.2 Raj be released on his executing P.R. of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount with condition that he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall attend the police station on every Sunday between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. till end of the trial. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)