BA-657-932.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.657 OF 2011 Avinash Giridhar Sawani ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Navghar Police Station, Mulund, Mumbai ... Respondent ALONG WITH CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.932 OF 2011 Vivek Vikas Vaiti ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Navghar Police Station, Mulund, Mumbai ... Respondent Mr. Prakash Naik for the Applicant in BA/657/2011. Ms. Anjali Patil for the Applicant in BA/932/2011. Mr. J.P. Kharge, APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 2 ND AUGUST, 2011. P.C. : 1. Both these Bail Applications can be conveniently disposed of by this common order, as the Applicants in both the cases are the accused in the same case. 2. I have heard Ms. Anjali Patil, the learned Advocate for the Applicant in Criminal Bail Application No.932 of 2011, and Mr. Prakash Naik, the learned Advocate for the Applicant in Criminal Bail Application No.657 of 2011, at length. I have also heard Mr. Kharge, the learned APP for the Respondent- State, at length. BA-657-932.sxw 2 Dixit 3. With the assistance of the learned Advocates for the Applicants and the learned APP for the Respondent-State, I have gone through the entire Charge- Sheet. 4. The Applicants are alleged to have committed murder of one Naresh Vaiti on 28th July, 2010. The said Naresh Vaiti is said to be the cousin of the father of the Applicant-Vivek Vaiti. The motive behind the murder is given as ‘obtaining share in the family property’. 5. The case against the Applicants is based only on circumstantial evidence. Admittedly, there are no witnesses to the incident. 6. So far as the Applicant-Vivek Vaiti is concerned, apart from the motive allegedly available to him, there is material against him in the nature of recovery of a weapon at his instance. A knife is said to have been recovered at his instance on 8th September, 2010 from his house. Also, a rain shutter and a full pant is also said to have been recovered at his instance from the same place under a Panchanama. It is, however, pointed out by Ms. Anjali Patil, the learned Advocate for the Applicant in Bail Application No.932 of 2011, that the report of the chemical analyzer in respect of the analysis of these articles has not shown that there were any blood stains on the weapon i.e. knife. The group of the blood found on the clothes could not be ascertained. 7. What is significant in this context that these articles are stated to have been recovered from his residence pursuant to a disclosure statement made by him on 8th September, 2010. But the search of the house of the said Applicant was already taken on 27th August, 2010, itself. At that time, these articles were not found. BA-657-932.sxw 3 Dixit 8. After carefully going through the material, that is available against the Applicant-Vivek Vaiti, except such recovery, there does not seem to be anything to connect him with the alleged offence. As regards the motive, statement of the wife of the deceased, that was recorded in the course of investigation, indicates that there were others who could have also had a motive to do away with the deceased. 9. The Applicant-Vivek Vaiti is said to be of 18 years of age. There are no antecedents. 11. As regards the other Applicant-Avinash Sawani, against him also, there is material in the nature of recovery of a knife and clothes at his instance on 2nd September, 2010. The clothes do not appear to be having any stains of blood. Though it appears that there were stains of blood on the knife, the group thereof could not be ascertained and even, that it had human blood, has also not been ascertained. 12. It is also submitted that Applicant-Avinash Sawani (the Applicant in Criminal Bail Application No.657 of 2011) had purchased mirchi powder from a shop and it is pointed out that in the post mortem examination, some reddish colour powder was found on the eyelids of the dead body. Except this, there is no other material to connect this Applicant with the alleged offence. 13. Considering the nature of material available against the Applicants, and all the other relevant aspects of the matter as also the fact that the Applicants are in custody since 27th August, 2010, and that the co-accused Sanket Pacharane has already been released on bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, I am inclined to release both of them on bail. BA-657-932.sxw 4 Dixit 14. The Bail Applications are allowed. OPERATIVE ORDER IN CR. BAIL APPLICATION NO.657 OF 2011 15. The Applicant-Avinash Sawani is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, with one surety in like amount, or two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each. OPERATIVE ORDER IN CR. BAIL APPLICATION NO.932 OF 2011 16. The Applicant-Vivek Vaiti is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, with one surety in like amount, or two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]