17crn2341-10 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2341 OF 2010 Mr.Umesh alias Babalu Bhimrao Mane. .. Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. .... Mr.Harshad Bhadbhade, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.P.S. Hingorani, A.P.P. for the State. .... CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED : 25TH JUNE, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard rival submissions at length on this application for regular bail preferred by the applicant for his release on bail during pendency of the trial in the matter of offences punishable under Sections 307, 353, 332, 333 read with Section 120B of Indian Penal Code. Investigation is already over and the chargesheet is already filed on 22.1.2010. 17crn2341-10 2 2. The matter is arising out of C.R. No.312 of 2009 registered on 29.10.2009. On the date of the incident, one accused in another matter by name Salim Shaikh was being taken to Karad for producing before the concerned Sessions Court. It was a time about 3:00 p.m.. When said Salim Shaikh was being taken in police escort from outside the Court premises to the Court room, all of sudden one person by name Dipak Patil, who is main accused in the present matter, appeared on the scene and sensing some trouble police officer who was behind Salim Shaikh accosted said Dipak Patil. Said Dipak Patil pulled out a revolver and tried to aim Salim Shaik probably in order to do away with him for taking revenge out of rivalry between two groups. Police officers raised an alarm and could manage to apprehend Dipak Patil along with revolver which was fallen down on the ground during the said commotion. However, prior to that Dipak Patil could manage to fire one round from his revolver. It hit one police officer by name Gaikwad causing him bleeding injury 17crn2341-10 3 on his abdomen. Dipak Patil was apprehended on the spot. 3. During the investigation, according to the prosecution, role of the present accused was revealed as one of the conspirators to do away with the rival gang member Salim Shaikh. Apparently there is no direct evidence to show that at the instance of such incident of firing present applicant was available on the spot. However, there are witnesses who say that about few minutes prior to the incident present applicant along with his other associates had left the spot after probably having obtained a date in the matter in which applicant and his associates were accused persons facing the trial before the same Sessions Court. Apparently at the incident of the firing allegedly one co­accused Abhinandan Zende was spotted by the police officers, leaving the spot hurriedly on the motorcycle. However, there was no such role assigned to the present applicant. 4. According to the prosecution, there are two 17crn2341-10 4 circumstances allegedly against the present applicant so as to implicate him in the present matter. First one being about 5­6 months prior to the incident of firing, there was a sort of meeting in which present applicant along with other associates including Abhinandan Zende participated at the foot of some hill near the residence of the said witness. According to the witness, they had consumed some liquor and noticing the presence of the witness they stopped talking. However, after sometime they left the spot and went in hilly area and thereafter the said witness heard sound of four rounds fired. The second circumstance, according to the prosecution, is finding of four live cartridges from the house of the present applicant on 23.12.2009 after he was arrested on 18.12.2009. 5. Admittedly according to the prosecution and as submitted by the learned A.P.P., on instructions from the I.O., that the said four live cartridges are of different make than 17crn2341-10 5 the cartridge used for firing which took place on 29.10.2009. Moreover, it is not the case of the prosecution that any other weapon or any other incriminating material was found from the present applicant. 6. Under the above circumstances, even considering the case of the prosecution, as against the present applicant, as to availability of the material mentioned above, the present application can be allowed releasing the applicant on bail on certain conditions. Hence the order :­ :: O R D E R :: [i] Criminal Application No.2341 of 2010 for regular bail is allowed and accordingly disposed of. [ii] The applicant ­ Mr.Umesh alias Babalu Bhimrao Mane shall be released on bail on his executing a P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/­ (Rs.Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one surety for the like amount of 17crn2341-10 6 two sureties of Rs.12,500/­ (Rs.Twelve Thousand & Five Hundred Only) each. [iii] After availing of the bail, as above, the applicant shall attend the Karad City police station on every Monday, Wednesday and Saturday between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon during pendency of the trial. While on bail, the applicant shall not in any way tamper with the prosecution witnesses. (A.R.JOSHI,J.)