Dismissed

Mohan Daji Kadam and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC13 Nov 2009APPA/288/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants convicted of murder challenged their conviction and sought bail or suspension of sentence, alleging accidental death and false implication by the deceased's mother. The court rejected the application, holding that the chance of acquittal and prior bail were insufficient grounds without a merits hearing.

What did the court decide?

Application for bail and suspension of sentence rejected.

Mohan Daji Kadam and Anr. Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL WRIT JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.288 OF 2009 IN APPEAL NO.1181 OF 2007

¶5

Mohan Daji Kadam & Anr.

¶6

.. Applicants

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

.. Respondent

¶10

Mr.S. D. Rupawate with Mr.M.A. Ingole for the applicants

¶11

Mrs.Usha Kejriwal, P.P. for the respondent

¶12

CORAM : J. N. PATEL & A.A. SAYED, JJ

¶13

DATE : 13TH NOVEMBER, 2009

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

Heard.

¶16

The applicants along with one Sunil are being convicted by 1^st Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in Sessions Case No.322 of 2005 wherein they were charged for having committed murder of one Sachin in furtherance of their common intention and found them guilty for having committed offences under section 302 r/w 34 by judgment and order dt.

¶17

¶18

19.7.07.

¶19

The applicants had earlier filed an application for bail. Subsequently, it was found that this was second attempt on their part.

¶20

The ground on which the bail is sought is that they were on bail during trial and secondly that the mother of the deceased had falsely implicated them and it is the case of purely accidental death which is projected by the prosecution as a homicidal death. Further there is an excellent chance of acquittal for the applicants and the accused no.2 and in all probability, they should be released on bail by assessing their evidence.

¶21

We have gone through the judgment and order of the trial court particularly emphasis is given to the evidence of the eye-witness, one of whom is the mother of the deceased. The incident narrated by Smt.Sushilabai, P.W.No.3, mother of the deceased which is corroborated by other witnesses was the basis on which the trial court has held the applicants and their associate being guilty of murdering Sachin.

¶22

Prima facie, we do not find that the reasons given by the trial court are ex-facie unreasonable merely because the applicants claim that they have an excellent chance of acquittal. They were on bail during trial or have an excellent chance of acquittal is not enough by way of ground to

¶23

¶24

suspend their sentence as the trial court has convicted them on the basis of the evidence of eye-witnesses which discloses that they have played active role in committing murder of the deceased Sachin. Therefore, unless the appeal is heard on merits, it cannot be said that they have been falsely implicated in the case. Therefore, the application is rejected.

¶25

( J. N. Patel, J)

¶26

(A.A. Sayed, J)

Mohan Daji Kadam and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Daji Kadam and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rais Mohd. Jamil Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shri Pratap Dinkar Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ganpati Vijay Kondar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Subhash Krishna Khot Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohamad Nadim Paloba Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohamed Hasan Salim Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra