In this bail application under the Bombay High Court, the applicant sought release claiming a minor role in an assault. The court rejected the application, noting shared common intention with co-accused and prior cases against the applicant.
bail application rejected; applicant not released.
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.
ba-330-14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
rpa
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.330 OF 2014
Kumar Damanna Waghmare .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
Mr. Aniket V. Nikam, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs. S.V. Sonavane, A.P.P. for Respondent – State.
CORAM : A.M. THIPSAY, J.
DATED : JUNE 10, 2014.
P.C. :
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. Heard the learned A.P.P. for the respondent – State of Maharashtra. With their assistance, I have gone through the bail application and the annexures thereto.
2 The applicant is named as one of the culprits in the First Information Report itself. The contention of the learned counsel for the Applicant is that the role attributed to the applicant is of a minor nature. He submitted that as per the version of the prosecution, the applicant was not armed with any weapon and that, the actual assailants were different persons. He submitted that the only role attributed to the applicant is that the applicant had hold one Yogesh Gaikwad who had
1/2
ba-330-14
accompanied the deceased Riyaz Shaikh at the time of assault. Thus, according to him, the applicant's case ought to be considered for release on bail.
3 I have considered the matter. It is true that the applicant
is not alleged to be possessing any arm or weapon at the time of the incident. It is also true that he appears to have hold Yogesh Gaikwad and not the victim at the time of the assault. However, it cannot be said at this stage that the applicant did not share the common intention to assault Riyaz Shaikh with the other co-accused. It appears that the applicant and the actual assailants came together and went together. It also appears that all the accused including the applicant chased the victim Riyaz Shaikh. Apart from this, the learned A.P.P. informs that there are two previous cases registered against the applicant.
4 In the circumstances, I do not think it fit to release the applicant on bail.
5 The application is rejected.
2/2
Kumar Damanna Waghmare
The State of Maharashtra
A.M. THIPSAY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
