IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 727 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 727 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 727 OF 2009 Bablu @ Chandrakant Matadan Shukla ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.A.P. Mundergi, Sr.Counsel i/b. Ms.Vishranti Navale for the Applicant. Mr.S.R. Shinde, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : APRIL 1, 2009 DATED : APRIL 1, 2009 DATED : APRIL 1, 2009 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard Counsel for the applicant and APP for the State. 2. The applicant has been arrested in connection with an offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with 34 of the IPC which is registered vide C.R.No.10/2008 registered at Poyand Police Station, Raigad, Alibaug. 3. Facts of the case are that the police found headless body of a male which was stuffed in a suitcase and soon thereafter, a body of a female was also found at a different place also stuffed in a suitcase. The - 2 - body thereafter was identified as that of Shabbir Ahmed Ibrahim Khalil and the body of female was identified as that of Mrs.Khairunissa wife of Shabbir Khalil. Prosecution case is that the applicant with the help of other accused committed the murder of Shabbir, his wife Mrs.Khairunissa and daughter Ms.Asma, aged about 30 years and by allegedly administering intoxicating medicine in the butter milk, to all the deceased after dinner and thereafter, Shabbir was taken to the bathroom and his head was cut off from the body with a sharp weapon. Similarly, Khairunissa and Asma were killed and their dead bodies were put in three different bags and were carried in a car and disposed of. The dead body of Shabbir was thrown in the water from the bridge of Nala, Asudgaon and dead body of Khairunissa was thrown in the river Patal Ganga in village Tara near Anjani Farm House and dead body of Asma was thrown in the creek from the bridge in the village of Kamothe Kopra. The applicant and the other accused were arrested. 4. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that there are no eye witnesses to the said - 3 - incident and the only material which is on record is that the deceased was found in the company of the accused at Malad and Panvel. Secondly, three suitcases were purchased by the applicant with the help of his friend. Thirdly, the Panvel flat was taken on rent by the applicant and deceased and his wife and Asma were residing in the said flat and were seen in the said flat. One steel container was found in the factory of the applicant appearing the name of Asma. One Eye witness Mukesh Jain in his statement has that the applicant purchased Phenol and Acid and lastly, another witness stated that the applicant had purchased sleeping tables. It was submitted that the other accused Prakash Ramprasad Dubey, Mukesh Danbahadur Singh, Sanjay Ramraj Pasi had been released on bail by the Sessions Court. 5. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant invited my attention to the panchanama which showed that the black colour suitcase was recovered in which the body of Shabbir was kept. He invited my attention to the statement of Shop owner who had sold the box to the applicant. He pointed out that the said witness has - 4 - stated that one bag was of Khaki colour and the other was of red colour. He submitted that therefore, the bag which was purchased by the applicant was not the bag in which the dead body was found. He further submitted that the material which is on record does not conclusively show that the applicant is involved in the commission of the said offence. The learned Counsel has taken me through the statement of witnesses recorded by the police. It was submitted that all these circumstances do not indicate that the applicant had committed the murder of the deceased as alleged by the prosecution. 6. It is not possible to accept this submission. At the stage of considering an application for bail, the Court is not supposed to weigh and sift an evidence and record a finding. The duty of the court is to find out whether in the facts and circumstances, the applicant is entitled to get bail in a case where the offence which is allegedly to have been committed is punishable with either death or imprisonment for life. The court has to see whether the material is sufficient to show prima - 5 - facie involvement of the applicant. Secondly, it has to be seen whether the applicant if released on bail is likely to tamper with evidence and thirdly, whether he is likely to abscond. In the present case, in my view, after having gone through the entire charge-sheet, there is sufficient material on record to indicate the involvement of the present applicant. In a case which is based on circumstantial evidence, the police have to show the circumstances which ultimately point out to the guilt of the accused. In my view, the material which is on record clearly indicates prima facie involvement of the applicant and therefore, at this stage, it is not necessary to record any finding on the basis of the material which is on record. The court while considering the question of grant of bail also has to consider the nature and gravity of the offence which is allegedly committed. The facts in the present case disclose that three persons were murdered and their body was disposed of in order to destroy the evidence of the crime which is committed. Taking into consideration all these circumstances, therefore, in my view, no case is made out for grant of bail. - 6 - 7. The application is rejected. 8. The trial court shall not be influenced by the observations made by this court while deciding this application and the said observations are of prima facie nature and the trial court shall decide the case on merits and in accordance with law. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)