Shaikh Shaharukh S/O Shaikh Alam vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 10969 Bom

                                       1                   Criminal Appeal No.653.22.odt




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


                  CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 653 OF 2022



Shaikh Shaharukh s/o Shaikh Alam,
Age 27 years, Occupation-Driver,
R/o. Gunaji Chowk, Dhanki,
Tah. Umarkhed, Distt. Yavatmal.                     ..      Appellant


                      .. Versus ..


1]   The State of Maharashtra,
     Through PSO Police Station,
     Umarkhed, Tah. Umarkhed,
     Distt. Yavatmal.

2]   Venkatesh Santaram Dharmakare,
     Age 31 years, Occupation-Business,
     R/o. Opp. to Bus Stand, Umarkhed,
     Tah. Umarkhed, Distt. Yavatmal.
     Mob. 9975616468.
     (Ori. Complainant)                             ..   Respondents


                   ..........
Shri R.R. Shaikh, Advocate for Appellant,
Shri A.R. Chutke, APP for Respondent No.1-State,
None for Respondent No.2.
                   ..........


                           Coram : Vinay Joshi and
                                   Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi, JJ.

                           Date :    18th October, 2022.
                                          2               Criminal Appeal No.653.22.odt




ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : Vinay Joshi , J.)



1.          The challenge in this appeal is to the common order dated

18th June, 2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad,

District - Yavatmal, whereby regular bail of appellant (accused no.5

Shaikh Shaharukh s/o Shaikh Alam) has been rejected.



2.          The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that

respondent no.2 i.e. informant has been served on 17.10.2022 by the

concerned Police Station Officer. Despite said service, Respondent no.2 is

absent. We have no alternative but to proceed further as the right of

liberty is in question.



3.          The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial

court utterly failed to consider the material in proper perspective. The

evidence collected during investigation was insufficient to point out the

complicity of appellant in the crime. The trial court has not properly

assessed the facts that besides the role of assisting the accused in

screening the offence, there is nothing against him. It is submitted that

similar allegations were levelled against accused nos.3 and 4, who have

been released by this court in Criminal Appeal No.479/2022, decided on

September 14, 2022.
                                         3                Criminal Appeal No.653.22.odt




4.         The State resisted the bail by filing reply-affidavit. The

appellant was arrested on 16.01.2022 in connection with Crime

No.18/2022 registered with Police Station, Umarkhed for offences

punishable under Sections 302, 109, 120 (B), 212 and 201 of the Indian

Penal Code, under Sections 3/25, 3/27 of the Indian Arms Act and

Section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.



5.         It was the prosecution case that accused no.1 has fired on the

deceased and as such committed murder.        So far as the appellant is

concerned, it is urged that the appellant assisted main accused to flee

from the place. In other-words, the appellant has provided his Swift

Dzire Car to travel from village Dhanki to Pusad and thus assisted the

crime. As per the prosecution case, incident occurred at Umerkhed from

where the main accused came to village Dhakni by riding motorcycle.

Thus, prima facie, there does not appear to be direct nexus of appellant

with the crime. Though, the prosecution has produced some CDR,

however, there was no contact between the appellant and main accused.

The principal allegations are against accused no.1, who is in jail. Having

regard to above facts and nature of allegations, it is a fit case to grant

bail. Hence the following order :
                                                            4                     Criminal Appeal No.653.22.odt




                                                      ORDER

(i) The impugned order dated 18.06.2022 passed by

the Additional Sessions Judge, Pusad, District - Yavatmal to

the extent of appellant-Shaikh Shaharukh s/o Shaikh Alam is

hereby quashed and set aside.

(ii) The appellant namely Shaikh Shaharukh s/o

Shaikh Alam shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R.

Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in

the like amount.

(iii) The appellant shall not tamper with the

prosecution evidence in any manner. The appellant shall

provide his residential address and cell number to the

investigating officer.

(iv) The appeal is allowed and disposed of in the

aforesaid terms.

(Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi, J.) (Vinay Joshi, J.)

gulande Signed By:ABHIMANYU SHANKARRAO GULANDE Personal Assistant High Court Nagpur Signing Date:20.10.2022 15:00