1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2918/2009 (Pramod @@ Gujju s/o Kanhiyalal Shahu vs. State of Maharashtra ) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order Mr R M Daga Adv.for applicant Mr D P Thakare , APP for Respondent Mr M P Lala,Adv.for Intervenor C ORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 4th September, 2009. 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties, at length. 2. By this application, the applicant prayed for grant of bail in respect of Crime No. 285/2008 reported at Ganeshpeth Police Station, for offence punishable under sections 363, 364, 365, 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR was lodged at the instance of one Ramesh Sunderlal Shahu, father of the deceased Rakesh, who received information that his son Rakesh was kidnapped by 3 / 4 persons and also came to know that the present applicant along with his three associates had proceeded by means of a Maruti Car and they were armed with weapons such as knives. In the course of investigation, statement of one Raju Sarmanlal Patel was recorded, who narrated the incident in details. He stated that on the fateful day, he was accompanied with Rakesh on two-wheeler Kinetic Honda. Raju was sitting as pillion rider with Rakesh. Rakesh had said that he wants to talk with Gujju Shahu. At that time one Opel Red colour was seen parked. Gajju and Rakesh had entered in the house of parents of Gujju‘s friend; Raju had heard noises of quarrel between them. It appears that he went near the compound, peeped inside the house and saw the incident. Rakesh was abused in filthy language and was assaulted at at about 6.00 p.m. Raju had also heard the names of assailants who were assaulting and Gujju was calling them as Mukesh and Ashok. Gujju and his 5/6 friends had taken Rakesh in an 2 injured condition and forced to sit inside the Opel Car; whereas Rakesh was not ready to sit inside the Car. At the point of time, Rakesh was forcibly made to sit in the car. Gajju and his three friends sat in the Opel Car while friends of Gujju by name Mukesh sat in Maruti Alto Car along with a young boy. Both the vehicles had proceeded from Bazeria chowk leading to Santra Market. At that time, Raju had requested one Golu Dikshit to drive the Kinetic Honda -2 wheeler and leave him at his house as he was not knowing how to drive. According to Raju Patel, since Gujju Shahu was a known goonda in the area, he could not save Rakesh or help him, obviously due to fear. It is also revealed that niece of Gujju, by name, Pranita and deceased Rakesh had visited Hotel Krishnam as deceased Rakesh was intending to marry Pranita which was opposed by Gujju Shah. Later on, it appears that the dead body of Rakesh was found on the following day on Amravati Road in an agricultural field. 3. Statements of very many witnesses have been recorded during the course of investigation including the statement of Pranita indicating enmity of the present applicant -Gujju Shahu and deceased Rakesh. It appears that in the course of investigation Maruti Alto Car was seized under Panchnama which was found containing blood-stains inside. The Mobile Phone along with Sim card was also seized. Pieces of burnt clothes as also knife which was found blood-stains. P.M. report indicated 23 multiple injuries as described in the PM report. In column No.17 including contusion over left chick as also incised wounds over left cheek, apart from contusions as also contused wounds and lacerated wounds ante mortem, probably because of death is mentioned as due to head injury. My attention has also been invited to the C.A. report indicating that blood Group of the deceased was detected on the weapons as well as other articles seized during the course of investigation from the present applicant, such as, full pant, seized from the applicant, was stained with blood group “A” which was detected as blood group of deceased Rakesh; as also knife which was seized at the instance of the applicant which was having blood group “A”. Incriminating articles, such as stone, nylon rope 3 and wooden stick were also found stained with blood group “A” group which, according to the prosecution, is the blood group of deceased Rakesh. Under these circumstances, there is direct as well as circumstantial evidence so also material collected during the course of investigation against the applicant, to believe his involvement prima facie in the serious accusations punishable under sections 363, 364, 365, 302 read with sec.34 IPC. It is also contended that the applicant has past criminal cases reported against him, under the Arms Act, Gambling Act, besides Indian penal Code. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the other co- accused have been released on bail. My attention has been specifically drawn to the Criminal Application No.2377/2009 which was filed at the instance of Ashok @ Vicky Shankarrao Khobragade, in order to claim parity with him. However, it appears that the bail was granted under the circumstances with stringent conditions in view of the contentions that eye witness did not identify Ashok @ Vicky Shankar Khobragade during test identification and full pant which was reportedly having blood stains seized appears to be washed out. In the absence of prima facie evidence to connect him, his prayer for bail was considered favourably. The reasons which led this Court to grant bail to co-accused Ashok appears different and were on the ground that there was absence of strong prima facie case against him. One co-accused Mukesh Shivhare was granted bail by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge on the ground of default in filing charge- sheet; while other co-accused Rajkumar Wankhede was also released by learned Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge Nagpur on the ground that he had limited part in abducting Rakesh and that he was not present at the time of actual assault. Be that as it may; each application with prayer for bail has to be considered in the light of the submissions advanced at the bar and material collected during the investigation against such applicant. 5. As against the present applicant, there appears to be strong prima 4 facie case to believe his involvement in serious accusations of kindapping as well as consequent murder of Rakesh. In the FIR itself, the applicant was named along with his unnamed associates. According to learned APP, five criminal cases have been reported at Sitabudli, Tahsil, Ganeshpeth and Sadar Police Stations, against the applicant- Gujju Shau, with serious accusations between the year 2000 -2008. It is also contended by the learned APP that some of the co-accused who were released on bail threatened witnesses in the present case. Learned APP states that the State is taking appropriate steps for cancellation of bail against the accused who threatened the prosecution witnesses. Be that as it may, under these circumstances, the application cannot be allowed. However, since the case is at the stage of framing of charge, the trial Court is expected to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible. Application is rejected. JUDGE. sahare