Allowed

Nitin Sudhakar Avchite v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 May 2012BA/580/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding a murder case, the judge granted bail, emphasizing the failure to conduct a test identification parade and the lack of forensic analysis on recovered weapons. The recovery of a shirt was deemed insufficient to establish identity without proof of ownership.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed. Applicant ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount.

Nitin Sudhakar Avchite Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2012)

BA580.12

Rng

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

CRI.BAIL APPLICATION NO.580 OF 2012

¶7

Nitin Sudhakar Avchitec.....

¶8

.. Applicant

¶9

¶10

The State of Maharashtra (th.Sr.P.I.Vadgaon Mawal police stn,Pune)

¶11

..Respondent

¶12

Mr.A.P.Mundargi Sr.Advocate i.b Ms.Radhika Kamat for Applicant Mr..H.J.Dedhia APP for State

¶13

CORAM: A.M.THIPSAY, J

¶14

DATE: 9 th May, 2012

¶15

P.C.

¶16

Heard Mr.Mundargi, learned Senior Advocate for the Applicant and Mr.Dedhia, learned APP for the State.

¶17

One Atul Ghare was allegedly murdered by one Banti Waikar and his two associates, who were, at that time, unknown to the sole eye witness one Nitin Ankush Bikkad. The Applicant is said to be one of the said two unknown person, who had assaulted the deceased, apparently at the instance of the main accused Banti Waikar.

¶18

With the assistance of learned Senior Advocate for the Applicant, I have glanced through the Charge sheet.

¶19

¶20

BA580.12

¶21

Mr. Mundargi submitted that no steps to hold any Identification parade to establish the identity of the Applicant, as one of the assailants were undertaken in the course of the investigation. This seems to be correct.

¶22

The reason advanced by the learned APP, on instructions, from the Investigating Officer, for not holding the Test Identification Parade in the matter, is not convincing.

¶23

The evidence against the Applicant consists of the alleged recovery of the weapons of offence at his instance.

¶24

I have gone through the Memorandum Panchanama in respect of the said recovery.

¶25

The recovery appears to have been effected from a place which was, in all probablity, accessible to all. Though the weapons are said to be containing stains of blood, no report of the Chemical Analyst in respect of analysis of the blood has been received so far.

¶26

The shirt which the Applicant was allegedly wearing at the time of the incident, is said to have been recovered at the instance of coAccused Mayur Sutar.

¶27

¶28

BA580.12

¶29

Mr. Mundargi submitted - rightly in my opinion - that this cannot be held as a circumstance, against the present Applicant, in the absence of any material to indicate that the shirt was, indeed, of the Applicant.

¶30

Moreover, the Co-accused Mayur Sutar, to whom a similar role has been attrributed by the Investigating Agency, has already been released on bail by the Court of Sessions.

¶31

Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, and particularly the failure to hold a Test Identification Parade, or even otherwise to get the identity of the Applicant as one of the assailants established in the course of the investigation, I am inclined to release him on bail.

¶32

Application is allowed.

¶33

The Applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount.

¶34

{A.M.Thipsay,J}

Nitin Sudhakar Avchite v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin Sudhakar Avchite 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

Shivaji Mahadev Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kashinath Dagadu Bandgar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jotiram Dagdu Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gurudatta Shantinath Pol Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ananda Shamrao Kadam and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Asmat Abdul Hamid Jaware Vs the State of Maharashtra