In a bail application pending appeal for conviction under Section 304-II IPC, the High Court found prima facie merit in the submission of false implication due to discrepancies between police arrival and FIR lodging time, leading to the grant of bail.
Released on bail in sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties to report monthly.
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 CRAPPA128810
jdk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.APPLN. NO. 1288 OF 2010 IN
CRI. APPEAL NO. 787 OF 2010
Jalindar Nivurtti Hede
..Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
..Respondent
Mr. Jaydeep D. Mane Adv. for applicant Smt. A.A.Mane APP for State
CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : OCTOBER 21, 2010
P.C. :
1 Heard the learned advocate for the applicant-original accused and the learned APP for the State.
2 The applicant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 304-II of IPC. The appeal preferred by the applicant is pending. The applicant is now seeking bail.
3 The prosecution case is that Raghunath was proceeding on scooter with Ramanand (deceased) to the petrol pump. On the way, the accused who is brother of Ramanand, met them. Accused demanded Rs.125/- from Ramanand. Ramanand told him that that time he had no
2 CRAPPA128810
money with him and he would return the money to him which he had taken from Ramanand, after he received his salary. Abuses were exchanged from both sides. Scuffle took place. During the scuffle the accused lifted Ramanand and threw him on the ground. Ramanand sustained injury on his head. He was taken to Basbeshwar hospital. Thereafter, he was shifted to Civil Hospital, Solapur. He died on the next day in the hospital.
4 The only direct evidence in the present case is that of Raghunath who is an eye witness to the incident.
5 The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that in fact Ramanand sustained injuries due to accident by fall from the scooter and the applicant has been falsely involved in this case by way of an after thought. He pointed out that though the incident had occurred at 4 p.m. the FIR came to be lodged at 11 p.m. He drew my attention to the evidence of the complainant who has stated that the police station was just five minutes away from the spot of the incident. Police reached at Basbeshwar hospital and police made enqiury with him. However, nothing was stated by him to the police. Police also reached Civil Hospital Solapur immediately after the complainant and Ramanand reached there. He has also stated that there is police chowky at the civil hospital at Solapur, yet the FIR was lodged at 11 p.m.
3 CRAPPA128810
6 I prima facie find some merit in the submission that the applicant has been falsely involved by way of an after thought on account of previous enmity specially on perusal of the evidence of PW 7 Dr. Ghatole who has deposed about Exh. 40 i.e. O.P.D. papers regarding Ramanand. The Doctor has admitted that in Exh. 40 initially under heading clinical notes, it was recorded that there was a case of accidental fall from the scooter due to slip at Kumbhar Wes at 4 p.m. The Doctor has admitted that however, these words were subsequently scored out. Thus, it is seen that after scoring out the earlier history, history of assault was stated in the medical papers. Looking to these facts, I prima facie find some merit in the contention that the applicant is falsely involved in the said case by way of an after thought. Hence, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
7 The applicant-Jalindar Nivrutti Hede be released on bail in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. thirty thousand only) with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. The applicant is directed to report to Jodbhavi Peth Police Station, Solapur once in a month till the disposal of the appeal.
8 Application disposed of.
[ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]
4 CRAPPA128810
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant bail to the applicant who is an accused person convicted of Section 304-II IPC, pending his appeal.
Whether there is prima facie evidence of false implication by subsequent thought based on discrepancies in the prosecution case track record documentation.
Jalindar Nivrutti Hede
State of Maharashtra
V.K.Tahilramani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
