Suraj Rajendra @ Rajaram Sutar vs State Of Maharashtra
2022 Latest Caselaw 13181 Bom

                                                                                     BA-1645-2022.doc




                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                           CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                     CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1645 OF 2022
                       Suraj Rajendra @ Rajaram Sutar                         ...Applicant
                             Versus
                       The State of Maharashtra                               ...Respondent
                                                             ....
                       Ms. Shubhangi Parulekar, Advocate for the Applicant.
                       Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for the Respondent - State.
                       API Vinayak Devkar, Paud Police Station, present.

                                CORAM                         : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

DATE OF RESERVING ORDER : 14th OCTOBER, 2022 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER: 19th DECEMBER, 2022 PER COURT:

Digitally signed by

1. The applicant is arrested on 2 nd July, 2021 in C. R. No. 445 of KAWRE KAWRE KIRAN KALYAN KIRAN Date:

KALYAN 2022.12.19 2019 registered with Paud Police Station, Pune, for offences 18:48:32 +0530

punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 427, 323

Indian Penal Code and 4, 27 of Arms Act, and 37(3), 135 of the

Maharashtra Police, 1951 Act.

2. The case of the prosecution is as follows:-

i. The First Information Report was registered by Mahesh

Raghunath Satav alleging that one Ganesh Dhedge was murdered

in 2016. Pratik Prashant Satav (deceased) and the complainant

were witnesses in the said case. Hence Kiran Balasaheb Satav and

Sameer Balasaheb Pandhre had grudge against them. The

complainant had booked a new car. The delivery was to be given

Kiran Kawre 1 of 7 BA-1645-2022.doc

on 8th October, 2019. At about 11.00 a.m., the complainant and his

friends Shubham Sanjay Satav, Pradeep Shashikant Raut, Pratik

Prakash Satav had visited the showroom at Wakad. They took the

possession of the car. The complainant and Pratik Satav left

together in the new car. The complainant was driving the car. They

were followed by Shubham Sanjay Satav on his motorcycle. On the

way they met complainants cousin Ajit Satav. He informed the

complainant that he should go home and bring his mother and

sister-in-law for performing Pooja of vehicle. The complainant and

Pratik went towards Savta Mali Nagar. At about 3.00 p.m., they

reached near Sonali poultry farm. They were blocked by tractor

coming from the opposite direction. Ranjeet Madhukar Kalamkar

was driving the tractor. The complainant was required to stop the

car. They were followed by Santro Car. Kiran Balasaheb Satav and

others got down from Santro car. Kiran Balasaheb Satav was

carrying sickle, Sameer Balasaheb Pandhre, Kiran Shivaji Kalamkar,

Mahesh Davre were also carrying sickle. Ranjeet Madhukar

Kalamkar got down from the tractor with iron sickle. Two unknown

persons were accompanying the accused and they were also armed

with sickles. Kiran Balasaheb Satav banged the sickle on the front

screen of the car and broke the front screen of car. The accused

pulled Pratik Satav out of the vehicle and all of them assaulted him

Kiran Kawre 2 of 7 BA-1645-2022.doc

with weapons. The complainant got down from the vehicle and

tried to intervene. He was assaulted with fist blows. He was chased

by the accused with weapons in their hand. Shubham Sanjay Satav

came to the spot with father of Pratik. Sister of Pratik also came to

the spot. The accused ran away from the spot. Pratik Satav

succumbed to injuries. He was declared dead. Investigation

proceeded statements of witnesses were recorded. Charge-sheet

was filed.

3. The applicant preferred an application for Bail before the

Court of Sessions. The said application was rejected vide Order

dated 1st December, 2021.

4. Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that, the

applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant is

not named in the FIR. He was arrested on suspicion. The name of

the applicant was referred to in the supplementary statements of

witnesses. The version of the witnesses in the supplementary

statements is in the nature of hearsay. The identification parade

was conducted on 24th December, 2021, although the applicant was

arrested on 2nd July, 2021. The alleged incident had occurred on 8 th

October, 2019. Thus the test identification parade was conducted

after two years from the date of incident and after about six

months from the date of arrest. Test identification parade is

Kiran Kawre 3 of 7 BA-1645-2022.doc

defective. The weapon is recovered from the applicant, after two

years from the date of the incident. Co-accused Ganesh Kadam has

been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 24 th March, 2022.

The other accused Akshay Kudale, Vaibhav Tapkir, Mahesh Kadam,

Vijay Namdeo Kudale were granted Bail by the Court of Sessions.

5. Learned APP submitted that, the offence is of serious nature.

The first informant and other eye witnesses have referred to

participation of two unknown persons. The applicant is one of

them. During the course of investigation, involvement of the

applicant was released. Attempts were made to arrest him. He was

absconding. Proclamation was issued against him, declaring him as

absconder. He was arrested at Aurangabad. He has been identified

by the eye witnesses in the test identification parade. The victim

was brutally assaulted with weapons. The accused were armed

with dangerous weapons. There is recovery from the applicant. The

delay in holding test identification parade is not a ground for grant

of bail. The role of the co-accused who were granted bail can be

distinguished. The applicant was involved in the past in C. R. No.54

of 2013 registered with Paud Police Station for an offences

punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, in the

Kiran Kawre 4 of 7 BA-1645-2022.doc

previous case registered under Section 302 of the IPC with Paud

Police Station, the applicant was tried before the Court of Sessions

and he has been acquitted vide judgment and Order dated 28 th

March, 2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in

Sessions Case No.522 of 2013.

7. The case of the prosecution is that, the deceased was the

witness in the murder case of one Ganesh Dhedge. Kiran Balasaheb

Satav and Sameer Balasaheb Pandhre had a grudge against him on

that count. They used to pickup quarrels with the deceased and the

first informant. The incident had occurred on 8th October 2019. The

first informant and the deceased were travelling in the car which

was blocked by the accused. There were several assailants. All of

them were armed with deadly weapons like sickle. The applicant is

not named in the first information report. However, there is

reference of two unknown persons being assailants involved in

assaulting, the deceased with sickle. The first informant has also

recover to presence of Shubham Sanjay Satav, Prakash Baban Satav

and Priyanka Sandeep Raut at the spot of incident. Statement of

the father of the victim Prakash Baban Satav was recorded on 9 th

October, 2019. He is an eye witness to the incident. He has referred

to assault by the accused. He also referred to assault by two

unknown persons. His version is similar to first informant. The

Kiran Kawre 5 of 7 BA-1645-2022.doc

applicant was not named in his statement. His supplementary

statement was recorded on 28th October, 2019 wherein he stated

that his son Pratik was murdered at the instance of Mahesh

Tanhaji Kadam and Ganesh Tanhaji Kadam by Ranjeet Kalamkar,

Kiran Balasaheb Satav Sameer Balasaheb Pandhre, Kiran Shivaji

Kalamkar, Mahesh Gavde Suraj @ Sonya Santosh Gavde, Vijay

Kudale, Akshay Kudale, Suraj Sutar by hatching conspiracy they

were healp by Vaibhav Sanjay Tapkir was running away from the

spot. Statement of Shubham Satav was recorded on 9 th October,

2019 wherein he has also referred to assault by two unknown

persons alongwith the other persons who are named in his

statement. His supplementary statement was also recorded on 28 th

October, 2019 it is similar to the statement of other eye witnesses.

Statement of Priyanka Sandeep Raut (sister of deceased) was

recorded on 9th October, 2019. She has named the assailants and

two unknown persons as assailants. Her supplementary statement

was recorded on 28th October, 2019 where reference is made to the

involvement of the applicant. On completing investigation charge-

sheet was filed. The applicant was not arrested. Proclomation was

issued under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the

applicant was declared absconding. He was arrested on 2 nd July,

2021 at Aurangabad. He could be arrested after a period of about

Kiran Kawre 6 of 7 BA-1645-2022.doc

two years from the date of incident. Weapon used in the crime has

been recovered from the applicant. The prosecution case is that, the

applicant was driving Santro Car and went to the spot and

assaulted the victim. There are eye witnesses to the incident.

Applicant has been identified by eye witnesses. It is true that the

parade was conducted after about of two years from the date of

incident. However the applicant was absconding. Inspite of

proclamation, the applicant could not be arrested immediately. The

applicant was remanded to judicial custody on 6 th July, 2021. Letter

was forwarded to the tehsildar immediately on 7th July, 2021 for

conducting parade. However identification parade could be

conducted on 24th December, 2021. The ground that, the parade

was defective or it was conducted belatedly will be considered

during the trial. The role of co-accused who were granted bail can

be distinguished. There involvement stand on different footing.

They were not the assailants in the crime. Considering the factual

aspects no case is made out for grant of bail.

ORDER

. Criminal Bail Application No. 1645 of 2022 is

rejected and disposed off.

                                           (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)


Kiran Kawre                          7 of 7