Bombay High Court
Rajshekhar Adappa Pantoji And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 August, 2017
Bench: T.V. Nalawade
Shridhar Sutar 1 38-ba-662, 663.17.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 662 OF 2017
Mrs. Rupa Shrishail Mandoli ... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
WITH
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 663 OF 2017
1. Rajshekhar Adappa Pantoji
2. Bhutalsidha Hanmant Indi ... Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondents
.....
Mr. Nitesh Mohite i/b Mr. Jaydeep D. Mane for the Applicant.
Mr. S.S. Hulke, APP for the State.
.....
CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J.
DATE : 16th AUGUST, 2017
P. C. :
1. These applications are filed for bail. There is allegation
against the applicant in Criminal Bail Application No. 662 of 2017
that she had an affair with applicant from Criminal Bail
Application No. 663 of 2017 and as the deceased was the husband
of the applicant, they decided to finish the deceased.
1 of 4
Shridhar Sutar 2 38-ba-662, 663.17.doc
2. Both sides are heard.
3. The dead body of Shrishail, the son of Mallappa, resident of
village Koluragi, tal. Indi, Dist. Bijapur (Karnataka State) was
found in village Khudus, Tal. Malshiras, Dist. Solapur
(Maharashtra State) on 07/07/2016. After committing murder, a
stone was used to crush his face to see that nobody is able to
identify him. By the side dead body one white banian was lying
and the circumstances show that Shrishail was murdered there.
One weapon (tommy) was found there. One key of vehicle was
also found there.
4. It is the case of Mallappa that there was phone call to him of
a stranger and due to that he had suspicion and he approached
the police on 18/07/2017. First, missing report was given.
Karnataka police then informed him that one dead body was
found in Maharashtra by Malshiras police. He went to Malshiras
and thereafter saw the photograph and he identified the dead
body of Shrishail. As there was illicit relations between the wife
of Shrishail and applicant No.1 in Criminal Bail Application No.
663 of 2017, there was suspicion against her. First, the applicant
2 of 4
Shridhar Sutar 3 38-ba-662, 663.17.doc
in Criminal Bail Application No.663/2017 came to be arrested.
During interrogation, he disclosed the name of the applicant of
other proceeding. Police gave a call on 25/07/2017 to the
applicant in Criminal Bail Application No.662 of 2017 and asked
her to come for inquiry. She was very much frightened and then
she admitted that on her saying, the applicant of the other
proceeding - Rajshekhar and friend of Rajshekhar had finished
Shrishail. Thus, there is material of extra-judicial confession
against the applicant of first proceedings.
5. As against the applicant of the other proceedings, there is
material like his banian found on the spot. His keys were found on
the spot and one pant of the deceased was recovered on the
statement given by him under section 27 of the Evidence Act.
6. Learned APP admits that along with papers, there is no
record of CDR showing that the applicant of first proceedings was
in touch with applicant No.1 of second proceedings. The keys,
however, which were found on the spot were tried and they were
of the truck of the applicant of Criminal Bail Application No. 663
of 2017. The material is sent for DNA test and the report is
3 of 4
Shridhar Sutar 4 38-ba-662, 663.17.doc
awaited. Thus, there is material of motive of extra judicial
confession and there is other material like recovery of articles at
the instance of Rajshekhar.
7. Considering the motive behind the crime and the aforesaid
material, this Court holds that the discretion cannot be used in
favour of the present applicants. In the result, both the
applications stand rejected.
(T. V. NALAWADE, J.)
4 of 4
