Nathsagar @ Tuka Ramnath Jadhav vs The State Of Maharashtra
2022 Latest Caselaw 13200 Bom

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

         CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4064 OF 2022
     IN APEAL/943/2022 WITH APEAL/282/2022 WITH
         APEAL/559/2022 WITH APEAL/943/2022

              NATHSAGAR @ TUKA RAMNATH JADHAV
                           VERSUS
                 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, Advocate for the applicant (appointed)
Mr. S. P. Sonpawale, APP for the respondent/State

                                     CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT &
                                              R. M. JOSHI, JJ.
                                     DATED : 19th DECEMBER, 2022

PER COURT :-

1.             By     this     application,   convict-applicant        is    seeking

suspension of substantive sentence awarded to him by judgment

and order dated 5th March, 2022 passed by learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Ambad, Dist. Jalna, in Sessions Case No.

63/2021.



2.             Learned advocates for the applicant submitted that

co-convicts are already released on bail and he deserves parity.

According to him the evidence on record is not sufficient to

connect the applicant with the crime in question and that the

learned trial Court has convicted him without considering the



22.ca4064.22.odt                                                                  1 of 4


     ::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2022                     ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2022 22:23:28 :::
 fact that the alleged incriminating recoveries from the accused

are not duly proved as the panch witness to the recovery has

not supported the prosecution. It is submitted that considering

the nature of evidence, the applicant has good case on merit for

seeking acquittal and hence, substantive sentence awarded to

him be suspended.



3.             Learned         APP   opposed   the    present         application.

According to him applicant is prime accused and considering his

role no party can be sought. It is submitted that there is

evidence on record to show that for the purpose of ransom

demanded by applicant, deceased has been killed. According to

him, there is evidence in the form of incriminating recovery of

cloths as well as iron rod and considering previous demand of

ransom by applicant, it is not a fit case for suspension of

sentence.



4.             Prima facie consideration of material on record shows

that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and as

convicts are is claimed to have been last seen in the company of

deceased. Though informant claims that prior to the incident



22.ca4064.22.odt                                                                 2 of 4


     ::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2022                    ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2022 22:23:28 :::
 applicant herein and others demanded ransom of Rs.10,00,000/-

from deceased Govind however, no evidence is brought on

record to indicate lodging of any complaint etc. Moreover, inspite

of said fact being within knowledge neither in missing report nor

in First Information Report, any suspicion is raised against

applicant. Statement of Santosh, who has claimed to have seen

two accused persons with deceased prior to occurrence of the

incident, is recorded by police on 2 nd September, 2017.                This

witness who is friend of father of deceased and hence he not

informing about having seen deceased in the company of

accused immediately is not acceptable. As far as recoveries are

concerned, the independent panch witness has not supported

prosecution and his testimony is apparently not worthy of credit.

Since police had already been to the spot where dead body was

found and hence recovery of the rod later in point of time from

the same place becomes doubtful and cannot be considered

incriminating against applicant. Considering these aspects of the

case, there is reason to believe that applicant may have good

case on merit. There is no likelihood of present appeal to be

taken up for hearing in short period of time and in the

circumstances, applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail by



22.ca4064.22.odt                                                       3 of 4


     ::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2022          ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2022 22:23:28 :::
 suspending substantive sentence. Hence the following order :-

                                           ORDER

i) Criminal Application is allowed.

ii) Pending the appeal, the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed by the trial Court is suspended. The applicant be released on bail on him executing of P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each (Rs. Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount.

iii) Applicant shall not enter Taluka Ambad, District Jalna, till decision of the appeal.

iv) Fees of the appointed counsel is quantified Rs. 10,000/- and it is to be paid by the High Court Legal Services Authority, Sub Committee, Aurangabad.

v) Bail before the trial Court.

(R. M. JOSHI, J.)                                    (R. G. AVACHAT, J.)


ssp




22.ca4064.22.odt                                                                     4 of 4