Allowed

Dilya Alias Bhika Ranchood Parmar and Anr. v. State of Mah

Bombay HC15 Dec 2009APPLN/3827/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Bench at Aurangabad allowed the bail application of two applicants accused of murder. The court observed that the investigation relied on circumstantial evidence without direct proof, blood matching was not conducted, and there was no possibility of tampering with evidence, warranting release on bail.

What did the court decide?

Both applicants released on bail furnishing surety of Rs.15,000/- and executing PR bond in the like amount, contingent on not leaving the local jurisdiction of Dhadgaon Police Station.

Dilya Alias Bhika Ranchood Parmar and Anr. Vs… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3827 OF 2009

¶4

Dilya/Bhika S/o.Ranchood Parmar, Age-19 years, Occu-Education,

¶5

Gautom S/o.Chima Parmar, Age-21 years, Occu-Education, Both R/o.Vericha Sisapada, Tql.Akkalkuwa, Dist. Nandurbar,

¶6

APPLICANTS

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Maharashtra, Through, Dhadgaon Police Station, Dhadgaon, Dist. Nandurbar

¶9

RESPONDENT

¶10

Mr.P.B.Patil, h/f. Mr.H.D.Patil, learned counsel for applicants. Mr.N.B.Patil, learned counsel for respondent State.

¶11

(CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.)

¶12

DATE : 15/12/2009

¶13

PER COURT :

¶14

By the present application, both the applicants have approached this Court for their release on bail in CR No.30/2009, registered in Dhadgaon Police Station of Dist. Nandurbar for an offence punishable u/s. 302 r/w. 34 of IPC.

¶15

This application is filed after the charge sheet is filed against

¶16

¶17

the applicant before the Court of Law after completion of investigation. The applicants were arrested in connection with this offence on 14/05/2009 and since then, they are in custody.

¶18

Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for the State. Also perused the papers of investigation placed in my hand as the investigation as stated earlier is already over.

¶19

Papers of investigation further discloses that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of father of the victim about the incident occurred in the mid night between 13/05/2009 and 14/05/2009 as the applicants as well as the deceased and their family members, they have participated in the marriage ceremony and were enjoying the dance and other activities till the late night. While these activities were in progress, the deceased Ganesh proceeded towards one field followed by these applicants and thereafter they were not seen. On the next day, dead body of deceased was found lying in the nearby field.

¶20

According to learned counsel appearing for the applicant that immediately after the alleged incident occurred, both the applicants were arrested on 14/05/2009. There is no direct evidence against these applicants appears to be collected during the investigation, and the case rests on the circumstantial evidence which according to the applicant is not sufficient to connect the applicant with death of the

¶21

¶22

deceased. Hence they be released on bail.

¶23

According to learned APP appearing for the State that the weapon knife used in the commission of offence was recovered at the instance of first applicant. It is also urged that blood stained cloths were recovered at the instance of both the applicants. The report of CA shows that the blood found on the knife recovered at the instance of applicant no.1, and the cloths recovered at the instance of both the applicants were stained with human blood. These circumstances were against the applicanta, hence application to be rejected.

¶24

Considering these submissions across the bar advanced by both the sides in support of their rival contentions, perusal of post mortem notes indicate that multiple injuries were found on the person of deceased, but the cause of death of deceased Ganesh is reserved as viscera is sent for the opinion of chemical analyser which is yet to be received. Apart from it, even though the blood was found on the knife recovered at the instance of applicant no.1 and the blood was found on the cloths at the instance of these applicants, it is surprising to note that the blood of the deceased or the applicants was not collected during the investigation for the purpose to match the blood group of deceased and the blood if transferred on the knife as well as on the cloths recovered at the instance of both the applicants. If this is the position about the investigation carried out and the case rests on the circumstances, then the case is made out to enlarge the applicants accused on bail as now there is no

¶25

¶26

possibility of tampering of any evidence collected by the prosecution. In the premise, application deserves following order :

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

Application is allowed.

¶29

Both the applicants be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount.

¶30

After released on bail, both the applicants not to leave the local jurisdiction of Dhadgaon Police Station till the trial against then is finally disposed of.

¶31

Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

khs/DEC 2009/cri.appl.3827-09

Dilya Alias Bhika Ranchood Parmar and Anr. v. State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilya Alias Bhika Ranchood Parmar and Anr. v. State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Vasantrao Yende Vs Sunil Bhupchand Mangwani

Rustum Babasaheb Pawar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Sanjay @ Raosaheb Nanasaheb Mane Vs the State of Mah

Maniram Padmsing Thapa Vs the State of Mah

Dattatraya Bhausaheb Pansare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Maroti Venkatrao Bhinge Vs the State of Mah, Thr Police Station, Udgir