Allowed

Kiran Bhaskar Kashid v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Mar 2010APPLN/5400/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In CR.No.5400/2009, the High Court granted bail to the accused, an original accused in a murder attempt case, due to the slipshod investigation where the accused was not named in the initial complaint or injury statements, directing report to the IO once a week.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail on a bond of Rs.25,000 with one surety in a like amount, subject to reporting to the IO once a week on Mondays.

Kiran Bhaskar Kashid Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5400 OF 2009

¶4

Kiran Bhaskar Kashid )..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra )..Respondent

¶5

Mr. Manoj A. Patil for the applicant.

¶6

Smt. V. R. Bhonsale APP for the State.

¶7

C oram : R.S.MOHITE,J

¶8

Date : 25^th March, 2010

¶9

¶10

1 This is an application for grant of bail. The present applicant Kiran Bhaskar Kashid

¶11

is original accused no.2 in C.R.No.36 of 2009 registered by Hatkanangale police station for alleged offences under Sections 302, 307, 325, 323, 504 read with 34 and 201 of IPC. The incident in question took place at about 9.30 P.M on 29.3.2009. There are 3 injured persons. The complainant in this case is a person by name Shankar Garad. It is seen in the complaint which was lodged by Shankar Garad that only accused no.1 Amol Mali was named and it was mentioned that there were 2 other persons along with Amol Mali. It is an admitted position that the present applicant who was not named in the complaint came to be arrested on 30.3.2009. Learned APP is not able to show as to on what basis the present applicant came to be arrested on 30.3.2009. The statement of the 2^nd injured Ajit Waghmare has been recorded after the arrest on 1.4.2009 and the statement of the 3^rd injured Manoj Kamble was recorded on 30.3.2009 but in his statement also he has not

¶12

¶13

named the present applicant. The name of the present applicant appears on the first time after his arrest. The record further indicates that instead of holding identification parade, the investigating officer has chosen to show these accused persons to the complainant, Manoj Kamble and Ajit Waghmare. Though the offence is serious, in my view, this is a case where grant of bail will have to be considered particularly because the entire investigation has been carried out in a slip shod manner. It also appears that accused no.3 who said to have wilded a sword has also been granted bail by the Sessions Court. In this view of the matter, it is directed that pending the trial in connection with C.R.No.36 of 2009 registered by the Hatkanangale police station, the present applicant will be released on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/ with one surety in the like amount subject to the condition that he will report to the Investigating officer once a week on every Monday till the completion of the trial. Application stands disposed off.

¶14

(R.S.MOHITE,J)

¶15

Kiran Bhaskar Kashid v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran Bhaskar Kashid 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju @ Rajshekhar Virupakshappa Wale and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Asgar Rahimuddin Pathan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Siddhartha Srivastava and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Abhiman Sarjerao Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Riyaz Ayyaz Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vilas Eknath Nandgude Vs the State of Maharashtra