Allowed

Rahul Balu Gaikwad and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Jun 2011BA/710/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to applicants accused of attempting to murder an accused person in a murder investigation, finding the prima facie facts did not disclose a strong case for attempted murder despite allegations of hospital intrusion with weapons.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail with ₹20,000 each and one surety in like amount, to report weekly.

Rahul Balu Gaikwad and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

jpc ba710-11.sxw

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 710 OF 2011

¶6

Rahul Balu Gaikwad and others

¶7

... Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Maharashtra

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

Mr. Shekhar A. Ingawale for the Applicants Mr. R. V. Newton, APP for the State

¶12

CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J.

¶13

DATED :- 24th June, 2011.

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

Heard.

¶16

I have gone through the copy of the charge sheet that is annexed to the bail application. I have gone through the papers of investigation.

¶17

One Avdhut Maruti Malvi was murdered on 4/6/2010 . In

¶18

connection with the investigation of the said murder, one Ajit Tiwade was arrested on 17/2/2011. He was admitted in the Prison Ward at

¶19

the Hospital for medical treatment. Some persons who are said to be accused in C.R. No. 31 of 2011, registered with Laxmipuri Police station, Kolhapur, went to the hospital and insisted that they wanted

¶20

jpc ba710-11.sxw 2

¶21

to see the said Ajit Tiwade. The allegation is that the accused persons in this case wanted to take revenge against the said Ajit Tiwade for having murdered Avadhut Maruti Malvi, and for that purpose, they had gone to the hospital along with weapons. However, as the police guards did not open the door of the concerned ward, the accused persons could not succeed in murdering the said Ajit Tiwade and went away.

¶22

On 20/2/2011, Rajarampuri Police Station registered a case against three persons namely, i) Jamir Maksud Bepari, ii) Ajit Dattatray Mohite and iii) Firoz Yasin Mulla, as they were found with arms and weapons. In the course of interrogation, it was revealed that they were from among the persons who had gone to the Hospital on 17/2/2011 allegedly for murdering said Ajit Tawade. On the basis of statements of the said three persons, who are the co-accused in this case, some other persons, including the present applicants, came to be arrested in this case. Among other charges, they have been charged for attempting to commit murder of said Ajit Tiwade.

¶23

Prima facie, facts alleged against the applicants and other accused, do not disclose commission of an offence of 'attempt to commit murder'. Even if it is accepted that the applicants had indeed gone to the Hospital with weapons, it would not amount to an offence

¶24

jpc ba710-11.sxw

¶25

¶26

of attempt to commit murder.

¶27

The case against the applicants appears to be based only on the statements of co- accused. Investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed. The applicants are in custody since 23/2/2011. Considering the nature of the allegation against the applicants and the material by which the allegation is sought to be supported, I am inclined to release the applicants on bail.

¶28

The applicants are ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty thousand only) each, with one surety in like amount.

¶29

The applicants shall report to the Laxmipuri Police Station, Kolhapur every Sunday between 11 a.m. to 12 noon till the disposal of the case against them.

¶30

( A.M. THIPSAY, J.)

Rahul Balu Gaikwad and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Balu Gaikwad and Ors. 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

Neha Varun Gupta Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Frank Henry Morris Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dawood Gaffar Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Willson @ Hunny Mosses Murthy Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajendra Ganesh Yellappa and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rashmi Suresh Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra