Bombay High Court
Sachin S/O Maroti Choudhary vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Salekasa ... on 13 October, 2022
Bench: V. G. Joshi, Vrushali V. Joshi
1 902.appeal.608.2022.judgment.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 608 OF 2022
Shri Sachin s/o Maroti Choudhary
(In Jail),
Age 32 Years, Occupation - Agriculturist,
... APPELLANT
R/o Jamakudo (Darekasa), Tahsil
Salekasa, Dist. Gondia (Ori. Applicant)
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra, through Police
Station Officer, Police Station,
Salekasa, Tahsil & Dist. Gondia.
2. Ku. Divya Amarlal Uike,
Age 19 Years, Occupation - Student,
R/o. Jamakudo (Darekasa),
Tahsil Salekasa, Dist. Gondia. ...RESPONDENTS
Mr. Rajnish Vyas, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mrs. Mayuri Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent
No.1/State.
Mr. Anirudh Ananthakrishnan, Appointed Advocate for the
Respondent No.2.
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND
MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 13/10/2022
ORAL JUDGMENT : [ PER: VINAY JOSHI, J.]
1. Heard.
2. ADMIT. Heard finally by consent of both learned counsel
2 902.appeal.608.2022.judgment.odt
appearing for the parties.
3. This is an appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Atrocities Act') challenging the order
of rejection of regular bail in Crime No.180 of 2022 registered with
Police Station Salekasa, District Gondia, for the offences punishable
under Sections 307 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 and 25 of the
Indian Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the Atrocities Act.
4. It is the prosecution case that on 10.6.2022 around
10.15 p.m. the appellant/accused has fired to injured Amarlal, who
sustained bleeding injury at his face and thus attempted to commit
his murder.
5. Daughter of injured Amarlal has filed report regarding
the incident on the following date. She stated that on the date of
incident, in the evening after dinner she along with her mother and
injured Amarlal (father) were seated in their house. At that time they
heard some commotion therefore they came out of the house but
there was no body. Informant and her mother returned and at that
time they heard sound like fire cracker on which they found that
Amarlal had sustained a bullet injury at his face. Therefore, she had
3 902.appeal.608.2022.judgment.odt
lodged report against unknown assailant. The police registered the
crime and carried investigation. According to accused merely on
suspension he has been falsely implicated and there is no
incrementing material against him so as to detain him.
6. Heard learned APP as well as learned Advocate
appearing for respondent No.2/victim.
7. With the assistance to both sides, I have gone through
the entire charge-sheet. The prosecution has relied on two
circumstances, namely motive and prior conversation of accused with
his friend, expressing his intention to kill the injured. It reveals that
one Vasist owns a tractor which was given to the injured Amarlal on
hire basis. The said tractor was stolen by somebody, for which the
report was lodged by Vasist. The injured Amarlal was suspecting that
the accused might have stolen the tractor. According to the
prosecution, the accused got annoyed since Amarlal expressed
suspicious about theft and therefore, he has fired on him. The
prosecution has primely relied on the conversation took place in
between accused and his friend Bhojraj, transcript of conversation
has been produced. It is pointed out that the accused has expressed
his anger and stated to his friend Bhojraj that he would kill injured
Amarlal as he has suspected him about theft.
4 902.appeal.608.2022.judgment.odt
8. The investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been
filed. Nothing is seized at the instance of accused. Admittedly,
incident took place in dark and nobody has witnessed the accused on
the spot or in the proximity. The report was lodged against unknown
person. Though prosecution relied on the motive, that can only act
as corroborative peace and not substantial one to base conviction.
The conversation in between the accused and Bhojraj was dated
29.04.2022, meaning thereby two months preceding the occurrence.
Even if, the conversation on prima facie basis is accepted as it is, still
there is a gap of two months and therefore the said aspect needs
consideration. Besides that, the prosecution is unable to point out
any other substantial material against the appellant.
9. Having regard to above facts, the appellant has certainly
made out a case for enlargement on bail, by imposing certain
conditions. In view of that the following order.
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 24.8.2022 passed in Miscellaneous
Criminal Bail Application No.262/2022 is hereby quashed and set
aside.
5 902.appeal.608.2022.judgment.odt
(iii) The appellant Sachin s/o Maroti Choudhary shall be released
on bail in Crime No.180/2022 registered with Police Station
Salekasa, District Gondia for the offences punishable under Sections
307 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 and 25 of the Indian Arms
Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, on his furnishing P.R. bond in
the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with one or two
sureties in the like amount.
(iv) The appellant shall not enter within the territorial limits of
Salekasa Police Station for the period of six months from today.
(v) The appellant shall not tamper the prosecution evidence in any
manner.
(vi) The appeal stands disposed of in above terms.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)
Sarkate
Digitally signed byANANT R
SARKATE
Signing Date:14.10.2022
16:58
