Dismissed

Avchitrao Govindrao Thombre and Anr. v. the State of Mah

Bombay HC9 Oct 2012APPLN/4068/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a criminal application seeking bail for two applicants arrested for murder. The Court observed that the trial would conclude in 5-6 months and there is material evidence against them, warranting dismissal of the bail application.

What did the court decide?

Application for release on bail was dismissed; applicants are required to remain in custody pending trial.

Avchitrao Govindrao Thombre and Anr. Vs the… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4068 OF 2012

¶4

Avchitrao S/o.Govindrao Thombre,

¶5

Age-60 years, Occu-Agriculture,

¶6

R/o.Javkheda Thombre,

¶7

Tal.Bhokardan, Dist. Jalna,

¶8

Gumphabai W/o.Avchitrao Thombre, Age-58 years, Occu-Household, R/o.Javkheda Thombre,

¶9

Tal.Bhokardan, Dist. Jalna APPLICANTS

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT

¶12

Mr.N.K.Kakade, learned counsel for the applicants. Mr.P.P.More, learned A.P.P. for State.

¶13

(CORAM : M.T.JOSHI, J.) DATE : 09/10/2012

¶14

PER COURT :

¶15

Heard both sides.

¶16

The present applicants, who are arrested by Bhokardan Police Station in Crime No. 54/2012 for the offences punishable u/s. 302, 201 r/w. 34 of the IPC, are praying for their release on bail.

¶17

The charge sheet is already filed. The case is committed to the

¶18

¶19

Sessions Court. The learned A.P.P. submits that the instructions are received by him from the concerned Sessions Court as earlier directed by the present Court. The instructions would show that the trial would be concluded within 5-6 months.

¶20

The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the case is based merely on circumstantial evidence and merely on suspicion that the present applicants may have committed murder of the deceased lady. The case is based merely on the basis of so called statement made u/s. 27 of The Indian Evidence Act and hence the applicants can be released on bail since the investigation is complete.

¶21

The learned A.P.P. however points towards the statement of an eye-witness i.e. Balu. Learned APP further points out that applicant no.2 Gumphabai has made a statement u/s. 27 of The Indian Evidence Act leading to the recovery of the ornaments of the deceased.

¶22

Considering the fact that the trial would be concluded within 5-6 months and that there is material evidence against the applicants and also considering the serious nature of the offence, application is dismissed.

¶23

(M.T.JOSHI, J.)

¶24

khs/SEPT 2012/cri.appl.4068-12

Avchitrao Govindrao Thombre and Anr. v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avchitrao Govindrao Thombre and Anr. v. the 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

Chandrabhan Ragha Agle and Ors. Vs the State of Mah

Dhondiram Narhari Munde Vs the State of Mah

Vaijenath Venkatrao Kaure Vs the State of Mah

Sanjay Motilal Parihar(Lodhi) and Anr. Vs the State of Mah

Kundlik Ghanshyam Kamble Vs the State of Mah

Shrikrishna Vasudeo Vhale Vs the State of Mah