Allowed

Sandip Motiram Gaikwad v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Jun 2014BA/465/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to the applicant, Sandip Motiram Gaikwad, charged under Section 307 IPC. The court noted inconsistencies in the prosecution case, including the absence of a recovered weapon and conflicting statements regarding injuries. Bail is granted on condition of reporting to the police station on weekends.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail for a sum of Rs. 30,000 with conditions of personal appearance on Wednesdays and Sundays.

Sandip Motiram Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

tilak 1/3 (16)BA-465-14

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.465 OF 2014

¶5

Sandip Motiram Gaikwad .. Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶8

Mr.S.R.Borulkar i/b Mr.Manoj Patil, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP for the Respondent State. Mr.R.S.Vhatkar, ASI from Rajarampuri Police Station present.

¶9

CORAM : A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED : 9^th JUNE, 2014.

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

1 Heard Mr.S.R.Borulkar, learned counsel for the applicant. Heard Mr.Y.S.Shinde, learned APP for the State. With their assistance, I have gone through the application and the annexures thereto.

¶12

2 The applicant and three others came to be arrested on the allegation of having committed offences punishable under section 307 IPC, 336 IPC, 341 IPC, 323 IPC, 504 IPC read with section 34 of the IPC. All of them were named in the First Information report as the assailants.

¶13

3 A cross case came to be registered in respect of the same incident. One of the accused in this case – Rahul Kadam – is the First Informant in the cross case. The cross case also relates to an offence

¶14

tilak 2/3 (16)BA-465-14

¶15

punishable under section 307 of the IPC. The injury sustained by the victim in the cross case is apparently of a more serious matter.

¶16

4 The First Informant in the crosscase i.e. Rahul Kadam does not speak of the presence of the applicant at the time of the alleged incident. The statements recorded by the Investigating Officer in the course of investigation in the present case do not explain as to how Rahul Kadam sustained an injury.

¶17

5 Out of the four persons named in the First Information Report, one was released under section 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “the Code”).

¶18

6 Though the applicant is alleged to have assaulted by a sword, no sword has been recovered from him or at his instance in the course of investigation.

¶19

7 Out of the three other accused, one as aforesaid has been released under section 169 of the Code, and two others have been released on bail.

¶20

8 The applicant is in custody since 14^th October 2013.

¶21

9 Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, inspite of the claim that some other cases have been registered against the applicant, I think it fit to release him on bail by imposing appropriate conditions.

¶22

tilak 3/3 (16)BA-465-14

¶23

10 The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.30,000/ with one surety in like amount, or two sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/ each on the condition to report to Rajarampuri Police Station on every Wednesday and every Sunday between 6.00 p.m to 7.00 p.m till the disposal of the case against him.

¶24

(A.M.THIPSAY, J)

Sandip Motiram Gaikwad v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandip Motiram Gaikwad 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Irshad Musa Landage Vs the State of Maharashtra

Radheshyam Gopichand Agarwal and Ors. Vs National Agricultural Co. Operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. and Anr.

Irshad Musa Landage Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dattatray Ramesh Dikshit Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ramchandra Namdeo Kalunge Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dinanath Khedan Bhagat Vs the State of Maharashtra