Bombay High Court
Bhausaheb S/O. Ananda Shinde vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Deulgaon ... on 22 January, 2024
Author: Vinay Joshi
Bench: Vinay Joshi
902-A apeal 672-23.odt
1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1102 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 672 OF 2023
Bhausaheb Ananda Shinde Vs. The State of Maharashtra
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1091 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 663 OF 2023
Hiralal Ananda Shinde Vs. The State of Maharashtra
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.T.Rahul, counsel for the applicant in Cri. Application No.1091 of 2023
Mr.N.B.Kalwaghe, counsel for the applicant in Cri. Application No. 1102 of
2023.
Mr. J.Y.Ghurde, A.P.P for non-applicant -State.
CORAM VINAY JOSHI &
MRS. VRUSHALI V.JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 22nd January 2024.
1. Both the applicants have been convicted for
the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of the
Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No.65 of 2018 vide
judgment and order dated 16.08.2023. Both have
claimed suspension on account of inadequacy of material
to establish their guilt with requisite standard of proof. It
is submitted that the trial Court erred in relying belated
statements of chance witnesses, as well as relied on
CCTV footage which in fact does not disclose the
occurrence. It is submitted that during trial both
applicants were on bail.
Kavita
902-A apeal 672-23.odt
2. One Pramod Dilip Sable brother of deceased
has lodged the report, regarding occurrence on
15.07.2018. Informant Pramod is not the eye witness,
however, after knowing about the assault, and
consequential death of his brother, Deepak has lodged
the report. It is the prosecution case that out of property
dispute, both applicants in furtherance of their common
intention have committed murder of Deepak by means of
sharp edged weapon.
3. The prosecution has examined several
witnesses, however, the prosecution has relied on the
evidence of three eye witnesses i.e. PW-3 Sushil
Janardhan Kharat, PW-8 Vikas Janardhan Gawai and PW-
11 Santosh Janardhan Lahane. Out of these three
witnesses Santosh Janardhan Lahane has turned hostile.
Thus, the prosecution case remains to the extent of
evidence of PW-3 Sushil Janardhan Kharat and PW-8
Vikas Janardhan Gawai.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the
applicants would submit that though they were close
relatives, their statements have been recorded after 23
days of the occurrence. From the cross-examination, it is
pointed out that they had attended funeral, had occasion
to interact with the police, however, they did not disclose
the occurrence nor their statement was recorded at the
earliest. Precisely, their evidence has been criticised on
Kavita
902-A apeal 672-23.odt
account of strong possibility of planting them in the
occurrence. The learned counsel for the applicants has
submitted that though the blood stained clothes and
weapon namely, knife has been seized, however, neither
there were blood stains on clothes or knife. The said
submission has not been denied by other side. The
learned trial court has relied on the CCTV footage
expressing that the participation of both applicants is
evident. We have been taken through the part of
evidence, wherein the investigating officer has stated
that CCTV footage is not clear. In order to have a prima
facie view, we have played, the CCTV footage in open
Court in presence of both sides. However, no one is
prima facie able to point out the actual occurrence seen
in CCTV footage.
5. In view of all above aspects, an arguable case
has been made out. The appeals will take it's own time
for disposal. In case of success of appeals, the position
would become irreversible. In view of that we are
inclined to exercise our judicial discretion. It is submitted
that entire fine amount is already deposited. Hence the
following order.
(i) Both the applications are allowed and disposed
of.
(ii) Execution of substantive sentence of both
applicants namely, Bhausaheb Ananda Shinde and
Kavita
902-A apeal 672-23.odt
Hiralal Ananda Shinde stands suspended till disposal of
the appeals.
(iii) Both applicants shall be released on bail on
their furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/-(rupees twenty
five thousand only) each with one surety of like amount.
(iv) The trial court shall issue release warrant only
after ensuring the deposit of entire fine amount.
(v) The pen drive shall be sealed and kept in the
safe custody.
JUDGE JUDGE
Signed by: Kavita P Tayade
Designation: PAKavita
To Honourable Judge
Date: 23/01/2024 14:53:29
