Bombay High Court
Sandip Rambhau Dhok vs State Of Mah., Thr. P.S.O. ... on 8 January, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
1 crappeal 62.20.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.62 OF 2020
Sandip Rambhau Dhok,
Age - 29 years, Occu. Labour,
R/o. Sawangi (Meghe),
Tahsil & District Wardha. ....APPELLANT
// VERSUS //
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through PSO Sawangi (Meghe),
District Wardha.
2. Priyanka wd/o. Rakesh Kamble,
Age - Major, Occu. - Nil,
R/o. Sawangi (Meghe), Dist. Wardha. .... RESPONDENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri N.D.Dawda, Advocate for the appellant.
Ms. Mayuri Deshmukh, A.P. P. for the respondent No.1/State.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : Z. A. HAQ AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED : 08/01/2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :
1. Heard.
2. Admit.
3. This is an appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (for short "the Act of 1989") challenging the order dated
18.12.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha,
::: Uploaded on - 11/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/02/2021 04:45:56 :::
2 crappeal 62.20.odt
in Criminal Bail Application No.580/2020, thereby rejecting the
application of the appellant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure in relation to Crime No.334/2019.
4. First Information Report came to be registered with the
respondent no.1 - Police Station against the appellant under Sections
302, 307, 326, 324, 120-B, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code read with Section 3(2)(VA) of the Act of 1989.
5. The accusation against the present appellant is that the
appellant gave blow of iron pipe on the head of the deceased and the
deceased succumbed to the injury while taking treatment in Sawangi
hospital. The appellant was arrested on 11.06.2019. The appellant,
therefore, filed Criminal Bail Application No. 580/2019 before the
learned Additional Sessions Sessions Judge, Wardha, which was
rejected by the impugned order.
6. The appellant, therefore, filed the present appeal in
this Court. This Court on 19.06.2020 released the appellant on
the provisional bail on the conditions stated in the said order.
::: Uploaded on - 11/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/02/2021 04:45:56 :::
3 crappeal 62.20.odt
7. Though, notice of the appeal is served on the
respondent no.2, the respondent no.2 has not appeared either
personally or through Advocate before this Court.
8. We have carefully scrutinized the contents of the
First Information Report and other material on record. The
appellant was arrested on 16.06.2019. The charge-sheet is
already filed. The investigation is complete. The prosecution has
not pointed out that the custody interrogation of the appellant is
necessary. The prosecution has also not pointed out that the
appellant has misused the liberty granted to him by the order
dated 19.06.2020. The appellant has stated that he has no
criminal antecedents to his discredit. We, therefore, pass the
following order:
ORDER
(i) Criminal Appeal is allowed;
(ii) The impugned order dated 18.12.2019 passed by the
Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha in Criminal Bail Application
No.580/2019 is quashed and set aside; and
(iii) The order of release of the appellant on provisional
bail dated 19.06.2020 is confirmed subject to the same
conditions stated in the said order.
4 crappeal 62.20.odt
Criminal Appeal is disposed in the above terms.
JUDGE JUDGE
Ambulkar
