Krishna S/O. Narayan Bhosale vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 6111 Bom

                                                                          1                              Cri.Appln. 2532/2017 


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2532 OF 2017.


                Krishna Narayan Bhosale                                         .....       Applicant

                VERSUS

                 The State of Maharashtra                                      .....        Respondents
                 & Others
                                      ......

                         Mr. N.S.Ghankear, Advocate for applicant
                         Mr A.P. Bassarkar A.P.P for respondent No.1-State
                         Mr. S.T.Veer, Advocate for Res.No.2
                                                        ......
                                               CORAM : V.K. JADHAV, J.

                                               DATE             : 16th AUGUST, 2017
                                                                  .....
PER COURT            :


                This      is an         application              for      getting release on bail in

connection with Crime bearing No. 148 of 2016, registered at

Vajirabad Police Station, District Nanded. The earlier application with

similar prayer below Exh.25 in Special (Atrocity) Case No. 45 of 2016

came to be rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Court

No.6), Nanded, dated 24-03-2017.

2] Brief facts, giving rise to the present application are as

follows :-

2 Cri.Appln. 2532/2017

On the basis of the complaint lodged by complainant Datta

Rajaram Kandhare dated 11-09-2016, aforesaid crime came to be

registered. It has been alleged in the complaint that, on 03-09-2016

father of the complainant namely deceased Rajaram had gone to

Nanded for some work. However, thereafter, he was not found. Even

on 05-09-2016 the complainant has lodged the missing complaint. It

has been further alleged in the complaint that, the complainant had

received the information from one Govind Khandare that on 03-09-

2016 accused Dnyaneshwar (juvenile in conflict with law) met him

near the Wine Mart and disclosed to him that deceased Rajaram, co-

accused Krishna Bhosale and he himself would take liquor and

therefore he was going to purchase it. It has been further stated in

the complaint that, deceased Rajaram was cultivating the land of co-

accused Vitthal Bhosale on contract basis, and one day prior to the

festival of Panchami, co-accused Krishna Bhosale, who is the nephew

of said Vitthal Bhosale had been to the house of the complainant. He

stared the sister of the complainant with evil eyes, and therefore,

deceased Rajaram had disclosed the same to Vitthal Bhosale. Thus, at

the instance of Vitthal Bhosale the present applicant had been to the

house of the complainant and on that day sister of the complainant

tied Rakhi to his hand. It has been further alleged in the complaint

that, by taking such grudge in mind the present applicant with the

help of co-accused Dnyaneshwar committed murder of deceased

Rajaram. On the basis of these allegations, present

3 Cri.Appln. 2532/2017

applicant came to be arrested on 13-09-2016 and since then he is in

jail.

3] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

prosecution case entirely rests upon the circumstantial evidence and

there is no direct evidence in this case. The learned counsel submits

that, except the evidence in the form of panchnama drawn under

section 27 of the Evidence Act, there is no other connecting evidence

against the present applicant. The learned counsel submits that, as

per the said panchnama, dead body of deceased Rajaram which was

totally in decomposed and burnt condition shown to have been

recovered at the instance of the present applicant. The learned

counsel submits that, though the prosecution case is based upon the

motive as shown in the complaint, the prosecution has come up with a

different motive. As per the prosecution story itself, the co-accused

Vitthal had illicit sexual relation with the mother of the complainant

and, as such, at the instance of co-accused Vitthal present applicant

and said Dnyaneshwar had committed the murder of deceased

Rajaram. The learned counsel submits that said co-accused Vitthal

came to be released on regular bail.

4] The learned APP submits that, though the prosecution case

rests upon the circumstantial evidence, there is chain of circumstantial

evidence and main link of the circumstantial evidence is that, at the

instance of the present applicant dead body of deceased

4 Cri.Appln. 2532/2017

Rajaram was recovered from the place which was within the exclusive

knowledge of the present applicant. The learned APP submits that,

there is prima facie evidence about homicidal death of deceased

Rajaram. As per the provisional cause of death, deceased Rajaram

died due to stab injuries to chest and partly burn injuries on his

person. The learned APP submits that during the course of

investigation, at the instance of the co-accused Dnyaneshwar certain

incriminating articles came to be recovered including the petrol can.

The learned APP submits that there is strong prima facie case against

the applicant. Thus, application for getting release on bail is liable to

be rejected.

5] The learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 (original

complainant) submits that, dead body of Rajaram was found at the

instance of the present applicant. It has been specifically mentioned

in the said panchnama drawn under the provision of Section 27 of the

Evidence Act, that present applicant has not only shown the place but

also inform to the police that dead body was of the deceased Rajaram.

The learned counsel submits that, present applicant has given

confessional statement during the course of the investigation when

the panchnama was prepared. It has been stated by the applicant

that, Juvenile accused Dnyaneshwar has murdered the deceased with

the help of dagger and thereafter, dead body was burnt by them by

pouring petrol on it. The learned counsel submits that,

5 Cri.Appln. 2532/2017

there is prima facie chain of circumstantial evidence against the

present applicant.

6] On perusal of investigation papers, it appears that entire

prosecution case rests upon the circumstantial evidence. Though

there is prima facie evidence about the homicidal death of the

deceased Rajaram, except the panchnama, under section 27 of the

Evidence Act drawn at the instance of the present applicant in respect

of recovery of dead body of the deceased Rajaram, there is no

connecting evidence against the present applicant. During the course

of investigation, certain articles like dagger, petrol can shown to have

been recovered at the instance of co-accused Dnyaneshwar who is

juvenile in conflict with law. However, there is no question of taking

him in the custody during the course of the investigation. It is

pertinent to note that, those articles shown to have been recovered at

his instance. Even though articles shown to have been recovered,

there is no further connecting evidence in respect of those articles. It

is not reveled during the course of the investigation that the same

dagger has been used for causing death of deceased Rajaram so also

the petrol can. In a case rests upon circumstantial evidence, the

motive plays great role. However, in the instant case, so far as motive

is concerned, the prosecution has come up with the different motive.

It has been alleged in the complaint that, the present applicant had an

evil eye on the daughter of deceased Rajaram, and

6 Cri.Appln. 2532/2017

therefore, deceased Rajaram had disclosed the same to Vitthal

Bhosale. Thus, at the instance of Vitthal Bhosale the present applicant

had been to the house of the deceased Rajaram, and on that day

daughter of the deceased Rajaram tied Rakhi to his hand. Therefore,

applicant had grudge in his mind against deceased Rajaram. On

perusal of the investigation papers, most particularly, the statements

of wife of the deceased and said daughter Manjusha, it appears that,

they have not stated anything about such incident. The prosecution

has also come with the another motive that there was illicit sexual

relation between the wife of the deceased and co-accused Vitthal and

thus at the instance of said Vitthal the present applicant with the help

of Dnyaneshwar had committed murder of deceased Rajaram. The

said co-accused Vitthal is released on regular bail for want of evidence

against him. In view of the above discussion, I am of the considered

opinion that the present applicant is also entitled for bail. Hence, I

proceed to pass the following order.

                                                 ORDER

I.          Application is hereby allowed.

II.         Applicant Krishna Narayan Bhosale be released on bail in

connection with crime No. 148 of 2016 registered at Vajirabad

Police Station, Dist. Nanded, on his furnishing personal bond

of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) along with one

solvent surety of the like amount on the following conditions :-

                                                                             7                              Cri.Appln. 2532/2017 


             A)      The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution

evidence in any manner and make himself available as and

when required by the Investigating Officer for the purpose of

investigation.

B) Applicant shall not enter into the village Thugaon, Dist.

Nanded for six months or till the trial is over whichever is

earlier.

             C)      Bail before the lower Court.



III.     Application accordingly disposed of.



                                                                          [V.K.JADHAV, J.]



YSK/