Sheikh Parvej Sheikh Rashid vs State Of Mah., Thr. P.S.O. Ps ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 11269 Bom

 Judgment                                    1                             apeal42.2020.odt




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                            NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.


                               CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 42/2020

          Sheikh Parvej Sheikh Rashid,
          Age about 24 years, Occ. Driver,
          R/o. Ward No. 25, Behind Jakir,
          Hussain Colony, Tarfel Road, Wardha

                                                                       .... APPELLANT

                                      // VERSUS //

 1]       State of Maharashtra,
          Through P.S.O., Wardha
          Police Station Wardha,
          District Wardha

 2]       Anil S/o Dilip Hatagade,
          Age 30 years, Occ. Labour
          R/o. Ashok Nagar, Ward No. 28,
          Tarfel, Wardha, Dist. Wardha
                                                                 .... RESPONDENT(S)

  *******************************************************************
                Shri A.M. Jaltare, Advocate for the appellant
               Shri S.S. Doifode, APP for the respondent/State
             Shri S.U. Bhoyar, Advocate for the respondent no. 2
  *******************************************************************

                           CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

AUGUST 18, 2021

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER:- V.M. DESHPANDE, J.)

1] Heard learned advocate for the appellant, learned APP for the

respondent no. 1/State and learned advocate for the respondent no. 2. With

ANSARI

Judgment 2 apeal42.2020.odt

the assistance of these advocates, we have gone through the bulky charge-

sheet placed on record.

2] ADMIT. By consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for

final hearing.

3] The cause for filing of this appeal under Section 14-A of the

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 was the rejection of the application under Section 439 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of the appellant in the Court of learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha. The said application was rejected on

04/10/2019.

4] According to the learned advocate for the appellant, the

investigation is over and there is no eye witness account. Therefore, the

appellant be released on bail. He also tried to point out the discrepancies in

the timing of the first information report, recovery of the dead body etc.

5] In this prosecution case deceased is one Sunil, the nephew of

the respondent no. 2 Anil Hatagade who lodged first information report on

01/11/2018. Prior to the lodging of the first information report one Anand

Hatagade - close relative of the deceased lodged a missing report with Police

ANSARI

Judgment 3 apeal42.2020.odt

Station, Wardha on 25/10/2018. In the said report, it has been specifically

stated that on 24/10/2018 Sonu Anand Shende came to his house and

informed that on 23/10/2018 at about 7:00 pm, deceased Sunil left the

place along with the present appellant in his Bolero Car. On getting this

information Anand Hatagade tried to locate and search the deceased,

however, in vain. The missing report also shows that he tried to make a

phone call on the two cellphones of the deceased, however, those were

switched off.

6] According to the prosecution case, during enquiry of this

missing report, when the police authority got a lead that the deceased went

in the Bolero Car of the appellant, they searched the present appellant and

that time they found that the appellant is residing at Gujarat. Therefore, the

police authorities apprehended the appellant and his friend one Sheikh

Mobin. During the investigation, the appellant shown the place where the

dead body of the deceased was thrown. In the meanwhile, the respondent

no. 2 lodged first information report on 01/11/2018. The panchanama and

recovery of body would show that the place where the dead body of the

deceased was thrown was a place normally not accessible to any person and

therefore atleast prima-facie there is a substance in the prosecution version

that the appellant has given his statement under Section 27 of the Evidence

Act in presence of the panchas. The dead body was found in completely

ANSARI

Judgment 4 apeal42.2020.odt

decomposed condition. With the result, when it was sent for post-mortem,

the autopsy surgeon could not give the exact opinion, however, Column No.

17 of the post-mortem shows that there were injuries of size 56 cm x 14 cm

and of 16 cm x 10 cm x 6 cm. That shows how brutally the deceased was

done to death. The charge-sheet also points out that there is recovery of

knife which was used for commission of the crime at the behest of the

appellant. What is important to note at this stage is that the cellphone of the

deceased was found in possession of the appellant which he handed over to

one of the co-accused. Further, learned APP pointed out that the broken sim

card of the deceased was also discovered at the instance of the present

appellant.

7] In the light of the averments made in the first information

report that the deceased was having love affair with Taiba - sister of the

present appellant which the appellant was not approving because the

deceased was belonging to Scheduled Caste, there is substance atleast prima-

facie at this stage in the prosecution case that there was a motive on the part

of the appellant to eliminate him.

8] In view of the aforesaid discussions, we are of the view that no

error was committed by the learned Judge of the Court below in rejecting the

application of the appellant for regular bail.

 ANSARI




  Judgment                                5                             apeal42.2020.odt




 9]               There is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed.

Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

                   (JUDGE)                                (JUDGE)




 ANSARI