This judgment disposes of two criminal applications seeking bail on grounds of parity. The court notes the lack of recovery and reliance solely on identification evidence. It grants bail to the applicants.
Applicants released on bail in Rs.5000 each with one or two sureties, one local surety, and reporting to police once a month.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4175 OF 2009
Shri Sanjay Balappa Tahsildar...Applicant
vs.
The State of Maharashtra...Respondent
Mr.Prashant P. Jadhav for the Applicant.
Mr.Y.M. Nakhwa, APP for the State.
with
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4176 OF 2009
Shri Yamanappa Shivling Tarihal...Applicant
vs.
The State of Maharashtra...Respondent
Mr.Prashant P. Jadhav for the Applicant.
Mrs.S.D. Shinde, APP for the State.
CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J.
DATED : DECEMBER 4, 2009
P.C. :-
1Heard Counsel for the applicants and APP
for the State.
2The applicants have been arrested in
2
connection with an offence punishable under Sections
302, 396, 397, 201 and 120B read with 34 of the IPC
registered with Ajara Police Station, District
Kolhapur, vide C.R.No.39/2009.
3A dead body of the deceased was found in
the forest and complaint was lodged by the brother-
in-law of the deceased and thereafter, the
applicants were arrested on suspicion.
4Counsel for the applicants invited my
attention to the order passed by this Court in
Criminal Application No.604 of 2009 dated 18th
February, 2009 wherein the other co-accused have
been released on bail. The applicants seek bail on
the ground of parity.
5I have perused the said order. There is no
recovery at the instance of the present applicants.
The only evidence is in the form of identification
of the applicants by one person who has stated that
3
the applicants had stayed in Samadhan Lodge at
Ajara. It is alleged that the present applicants
have been identified by one of the drivers, who was
present on the spot who has stated that the present
applicants and another were proceeding in his
vehicle and thereafter, the alleged incident took
place. Admittedly, there is no recovery at the
instance of the present applicants. The driver who
was travelling in his vehicle does not state that
the deceased was also travelling in the same
vehicle. In this view of the matter, the applicants
deserve to be released on bail on the ground of
parity.
6The applicants, therefore, be released on
bail in the sum of Rs.5000/- each with one or two
sureties each in the like amount. They, however,
shall give one local surety and they shall report to
the concerned police station once in a month.
7Applications are disposed of.
4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to release on bail on the ground of parity with co-accused.
Whether the evidence of identification by a driver without recovery necessitates denial of bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Criminal Application No.604 of 2009Referred¶24
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sanjay Balappa Tahsildar
Yamanappa Shivling Tarihal
The State of Maharashtra
V.M. Kanade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court