Vinayak Madhav Chavan vs The State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 2114 Bom

                                                                                 15. cri appa 573-17.doc


RMA      
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                              CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 573 OF 2017
                                               IN
                                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 341 OF 2017


            Vinayak Madhav Chavan                                         .. Applicant

                                 Versus
            The State of Maharashtra                                      .. Respondent

                                                  ...................
            Appearances
            Mr. M.S. Mohite a/w
            Mr. Ashish Sawant i/by
            Mr. Shantanu R. Phanse Advocate for the Applicant
            Mr. H.J. Dedia         APP for the State
                                                   ...................



                              CORAM       : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
                                              M.S. KARNIK, JJ.
                              DATE        :   MAY 2, 2017.


            ORAL ORDER [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :

            1.           Heard both sides.




            2.           The applicant - original accused No. 4 has been

            convicted under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC. The applicant is

            now seeking bail.




            jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                                    1 of 5




                   ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2017                          ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2017 00:32:39 :::
                                                           15. cri appa 573-17.doc




3.           It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant along

with accused Nos. 1 to 3 assaulted Sachin, Sagar and Kailas.

There are two eye witnesses to the incident i.e PW 4 Sheetal

who was the sister of deceased Sagar and PW 5 Sandhya

Kale who is the constable.             PW 5 Sandhya has stated that

four persons were assaulting three persons who were lying,

however, she has not identified the present applicant before

the Court. The other eye witness i.e PW 4 Sheetal has stated

that the incident occurred on 18.7.2012. She knew all the

four accused.               On the way, they met Kailas who was the

friend of Sachin. Kailas told that accused No. 1 Dattatraya

had assaulted Sachin. He told that Sachin was sitting on the

footpath. Sheetal then went to Sachin. She saw that Sachin

had sustained injuries on his neck and lip. She inquired with

Sachin what had happened. Sachin told her that accused No.

1 Dattatraya and accused No. 2 Sagar had assaulted him.

Meanwhile, accused Nos. 1 to 4 came near Sachin and

Sheetal.           They started abusing Sheetal, Sagar and Kailas.

Accused No. 2 Sagar Tambade took out a knife and stabbed



jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                         2 of 5




       ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2017               ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2017 00:32:39 :::
                                                         15. cri appa 573-17.doc




Sagar Lahare. Sheetal and Kailas tried to intervene on which

the accused persons pushed them and started giving fists

and kick blows to Kailas. Accused No. 2 Sagar stabbed Kailas

on his abdomen and neck with the knife.               Sheetal tried to

intervene but accused No. 3 Ghanshaym threatened her.

Thereafter, accused No. 2 Sagar assaulted Sachin with knife

on his chest and abdomen.




4.           Mr. Mohite, learned counsel for the applicant submitted

that though in the examination in chief, PW 4 Sheetal has

stated that she knew all the four accused, however, it has

come in the cross-examination of PW 4 Sheetal that in the

FIR, she has not stated she knew all the four accused. She

admitted that she had disclosed the names of three accused

and she had disclosed the description of the fourth person as

wearing thick spectacles, however, in her examination, she

has stated that accused No. 2 Sagar who was wearing

spectacles had assaulted Sachin.            In addition, Mr. Mohite

pointed out that the fact that accused Nos. 1 to 4 abused



jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                       3 of 5




       ::: Uploaded on - 03/05/2017             ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2017 00:32:39 :::
                                                          15. cri appa 573-17.doc




them is an omission which is seen from paragraph 25 of the

evidence of PW 4 Sheetal. He also pointed out that Sheetal

has stated in paragraph 25 that she was knowing the fourth

assailant but she cannot assign any reason why it is not

written so in her complaint. She has further stated that she

did not remember if she had given description of fourth

assailant to the police while lodging the complaint or even

before the Magistrate. It is seen that no role of assault with

weapon to any of the deceased is attributed to the present

applicant.             Looking to the evidence and the omissions

brought on record, we are inclined to grant bail to the

applicant. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order:-

                                      ORDER

i. The applicant to be released on bail in the

sum of Rs. 30,000/- [ Rs. Thirty Thousand ]

with one or two sureties to make up the said

amount and P.R. Bond in like amount.

ii. The applicant shall report to Vishrambagwada

Police Station once in a month i.e first Monday

of every month.

jfoanz vkacsjdj 4 of 5

15. cri appa 573-17.doc

5. The application is allowed in the above terms.

[ M.S. KARNIK, J. ]                   [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]




jfoanz vkacsjdj                                                          5 of 5