MP 1 BA1199_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1199 OF 2011 Pradip Balu Ghule ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Sachin R. Pawar, Advocate for the Applicant. Smt.R.V. Newton, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM : J. H. BHATIA, J. DATE : 8TH DECEMBER 2011 P. C. : The applicant seeks to be released on bail in crime No.271 of 2009 registered with Chatushringi Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Section 302 r/w. Sections 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that accused No.1 Arvind Ghadole married to one Urvashi Dhavle in the year 2001 and they began to live in a flat at Pune. After some time, Arvind returned to Nagpur and did not come back for a long time. Therefore, his wife Urvashi went to Nagpur and found that Arvind was already married to another woman. Thereafter, Urvashi returned to Pune and started doing job. Some family disputes arose between them, and the matter was taken to the Courts. According to prosecution, being frustrated of the court cases and the other issues, said Arvind gave a contract to one Uday Deshpande to kill Urvashi for which he was to pay Rs.2 lakh. Uday agreed to get her killed through his servants namely Sachin Meshram and Ganpat Gaikwad. On 08.07.2009, in the night, Urvashi was killed. On the next day, the offence was registered against unknown persons. During the investigation, besides Arvind Ghadole, Uday Deshpande, Sachin Meshram and Ganpat MP 2 BA1199_11 Gaikwad, five other persons were arrested as accused. According to the prosecution, the present applicant was also involved in commission of the crime. He was arrested on 16.07.2009, and from his person, blood stained shirt, pant and a mobile handset were recovered. According to the prosecution, as per the CA report, human blood of group AB was found on the clothes of the present applicant. It was a blood group of the deceased. Besides this, there is no evidence to connect the present applicant with the offence. The applicant is in custody for last about two and half years and trial has not yet commenced. Some of the accused persons have been granted bail in view of the role attributed to them. Taking into consideration the material against the present applicant, I find no valid reason to refuse bail to him. 3. Therefore, the applicant be released on his executing P.R. of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in like amount with condition that he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. (J. H. BHATIA, J)