jpc ba687-11.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 687 OF 2011 Arvind Ashok Mote ... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Vijay Hiremath for the applicant Mr. J. P. Kharge, APP for the State Ms. Deepali Dhage, P.I, CID, Pune, I. O. present CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 19th July, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Hiremath, the learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. Kharge, the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant has been arrested on 14/2/2011 in C.R. No. 430 of 2006 of Sahakar Nagar Police Station, Pune. The said C.R. is in respect of the offences punishable under section 302, 201, 202 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The same was registered on 4/10/2006. 3. One Priyanka Nanaware, allegedly, died a homicidal death on 13/9/2006. Her father-Yashwant Nanaware and her brother- Nikhil are alleged to have murdered her by beating. The reason for the beating, jpc ba687-11.sxw 2 as given, was that the said Priyanka had an affair with the present applicant which was disliked by the father and brother of Priyanka. The father of Priyanka is a policeman. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed against Priyanka's father- Yashwant- and brother-Nikhil- in February, 2007. Only the said two persons- Yashwant and Nikhil were accused in the said case. Incidentally, the present applicant was cited as a witness in the said case. On 14/2/2011, suddenly, the applicant came to be arrested on the same allegation that had been levelled against the other two accused:- i.e. of having murdered Priyanka. This is supposed to be the result of some further investigation that was carried out by a different branch of the police. 4. I have gone through the statements recorded in the course of further investigation. It is not necessary to discuss the contents of those statements, except observing that they, admittedly, make out no case against the applicant of having murdered said Priyanka. It is strange on the part of the investigating agency to level the accusation of the same offence against the applicant without exonerating the two other accused who were initially arrested. 5. Even otherwise, the allegation against the applicant is absurd. jpc ba687-11.sxw 3 In the first place, it is doubtful, whether there is sufficient material to indicate that the death of Priyanka was homicidal. In the second place, so far as the applicant is concerned, the allegation has been levelled after about five years from the incident and without any sufficient basis. 6. The other two accused have already been released on bail. The applicant deserves to be released on bail. 7. The application is allowed. 8. The Applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees fifteen thousand only) with one surety in like amount or cash of Rs.15,000/- in-lieu of surety. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)