High Court allowed criminal application for suspension of sentence and bail. Granted bail to 63-year-old female applicant accused of murder under trial, noting prima facie case and age.
Application allowed; order of sentence suspended; applicant released on bail under Section 437 CrPC on same terms as other co-accused.
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.
2502appa97.14
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 97 OF 2014
Umabai wd/o Dhanraj Bopche VERSUS State of Maharashtra thr PSO Tirora Distt. Gondia
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders
Shri S. G. Karmarkar counsel for the applicant. Shri N. S. Khubalkar APP for the respondent/State.
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI_AND A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.
DATE : FEBRUARY 25, 2014 .
This is an application for suspension of sentence on behalf of appellant no. 2-original accused no. 2.
By order dated 20th March 2013 the appellant no. 3-original accused no. 3 has already been enlarged on bail subject to certain conditions.
The conviction of the present appellant is for having committed offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is the case of the prosecution that has been upheld by the Sessions Court that on 5th August 2009 the appellants had caused the death of Nalubai. This was preceded by demand of various amounts towards dowry by the appellants.
In so far as the present applicant is concerned it can be found on record that the material indicates that she being the mother was residing in the same house but in different room. The basis for her conviction is that the clothes on the deceased were found to have been changed when the
2502appa97.14
2
dead body was detected. Besides this there is no direct evidence on record that has been relied upon to convict the appellant no.2 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the applicant therefore submits that the case insofar as Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code has not been proved against the present appellant.
Shri Khubalkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has however opposed the application and submitted that considering the circumstantial evidence on record including the presence of present applicant when the death of Nalubai occurred, it is clear that the present applicant has also been rightly convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has by placing reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Raj Kumar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan (2013) 5 Supreme Court Cases 722 submitted that there was no explanation given by the appellant no. 2 with regard to the incriminating circumstances that were put to her in her examination under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Learned counsel therefore submitted that as the chain of circumstance is complete the present applicant was not entitled to be released on bail.
Primafacie we find from the material on record that the evidence indicates that though the appellant no.2 was residing in the same house, she was occupying another room. Only on the circumstance that clothes of the deceased were found changed when the dead body was detected we find that primafacie case has been made out insofar as
2502appa97.14
3
applicant no.2 is concerned. In so far as the aspect of failure to explain about the incriminating circumstances is concerned, the same would merely be an additional link in the chain of circumstances as held in Raj Kumar Singh (supra). That would not be a circumstance by itself. A prima facie case has therefore been made out for grant of bail.
More over the applicant being aged 63 years and a woman, in view of the provisions of Section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code she is entitled to be released on bail during pendency of the present appeal. Hence and also in view of the earlier order dated 20th March 2013 in so far as appellant no.3 is concerned, the present application is allowed. Order of sentence shall stand suspended and the present applicant i. e. appellant No. 2 is directed to be released on bail on the same terms and conditions that were imposed during the pendency of the trial. Application is allowed and disposed of.
JUDGE
JUDGE
svk
4 2502appa97.14
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant entitled to release on bail given prima facie case made out and age.
Whether failure to explain incriminating circumstances alone warrants denial of bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Raj Kumar Singh Vs. State of RajasthanReferred¶19
: Raj Kumar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan (2013) 5 Supreme Court Cases 722
Umabai
State of Maharashtra
B. R. GAVAI
A. S. CHANDURKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
