1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4603 OF 2009 1. Raju Laxman Bhandari, 2. Mahesh Laxman Bhandari ...Applicants vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.Hemant S. Deshapande for the Applicants. Mrs.P.P. Deshpande, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 25, 2009 P.C. :- 1 Heard Counsel for the applicants and APP for the State. 2 The applicants have been arrested under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the IPC registered vide C.R.No.I-1 of 2007 with Kasarvadavali Police 2 Station, District Thane. 3 The prosecution case is that the applicants were conducting the toddy shop originally belongs to one Janardan Patil. The prosecution case is that one Chandrappa had visited the said toddy shop on 11th October, 2007 and there was some altercation between the said Chandrappa and the applicants. Chandrappa was demanding a toddy bottle without making any payment and as a result, there was some altercation and the said Chandrappa assaulted applicant no.2 as a result of which applicant no.2 fell down on the ground. Applicant no.2 in turn slapped him 2-3 times. Said Chandrappa fell down and died on the spot. According to the prosecution witnesses, the applicant thereafter removed the body of the deceased initially out of their shop and when they realised that he had died, he brought the said body inside the shop and later on disposed of the body. The dead body of the said Chandrappa was found in a highly decomposed condition on 2nd November, 2009. In 3 the Post Mortem notes, the doctor was not in a position to give the exact cause of death, therefore, viscera was preserved and it was sent for chemical analysis. The report which was received indicated that the after the viscera was tested, it did not reveal any poison. 4 The learned Counsel for the applicants submitted the only allegation made against the applicant no.2 was that he had given 2-3 slaps on the face of the deceased and as a result of which, the deceased fell down and died on the spot. He submitted that even if the statements of eye witnesses are taken at their face value, the offence under Section 302 was not made out and therefore, the applicants deserve to be released on bail. 5 On the other hand, the learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the trial has begun and one witness has been examined, however, from January 2009 since the court to which 4 the matter was assigned, later on, could not proceed further. The learned APP also submitted that apart from the allegation of assault by the applicants, it was also alleged that the applicants were responsible for removing the dead body of the deceased. 6 After having heard both the learned Counsel at the length, in my view, the applicants deserve to be released on bail, particularly, because of the eye witnesses whose statements have been recorded by the prosecution. They have stated that the applicant no.2 had given only 2 to 3 slaps to the deceased and thereafter, he fell down on the ground and died on the spot. The Post Mortem report also does not indicate that exact cause of death. C.A. Report also does not show the deceased was poisoned. This being the position, in my view, the applicants deserve to be released on bail since prima facie provisions of Section 302 are not attracted in the present case. 5 7 The applicants, therefore, be released on bail in the sum of Rs.5000/- each with one or two sureties each in the like amount. The applicants shall report to the concerned police station once in a month. 8 The application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)