Dismissed

Sachin @ Gopinath Bhagwan Dhumal and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC17 Jun 2015APPA/659/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a bail application filed by appellants convicted under Section 307 and 149 IPC. Despite arguments regarding defectiveness of the attack, the Court held that the gravity of the offence precluded bail release during the pendency of their criminal appeal.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed with costs of 500/-. Appeal against the primary order stands admitted but continuation of imprisonment is allowed during pendency.

Sachin @ Gopinath Bhagwan Dhumal and Ors. Vs the… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

902-APPA-659-15.odt

¶2

1/3

¶3

Ladda

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CRIMINAL APPELALTE JURISDICTION

¶6

CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 659 2015 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 620 of 2015

¶7

Sachin @ Gopinath B. Dhumal & Ors ..Applicants/Appellants. Vs

¶8

State of Maharashtra ..Respondent.

¶9

Mr Kuldeep U. Naikam for the Applicant/Appellant. Mrs P.P. Bhosale, APP for the State.

¶10

CORAM : A.R.JOSHI,J DATE : 17^th JUNE, 2015

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1 Heard learned counsel for the appellants/applicants in

¶13

this application for bail during the pendency of the appeal. Also

¶14

heard the learned APP for the State. The appeal is already admitted.

¶15

2 The applicants/appellants were convicted for the offences punishable under section 307 read with section 149 of IPC and under sections 143, 147, 148 and 341 read with Section 149 of IPC. For the

¶16

offence under section 307 read with section 149 of IPC, the appellants were sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years. Though reportedly the applicants were on bail during the pendency of the trial, now they have been held guilty on the strength of the substantive

¶17

1/3

¶18

902-APPA-659-15.odt

¶19

2/3

¶20

evidence mainly of PW 2, injured himself. The role is attributed to every applicant as to taking part in the deadly assault on the victim. When he was coming home along with his young son of seven years old the applicants along with their associates accosted him on the way when they were armed with swords and other weapons and arrived at the spot on the motorcycles. Initially, assault was on the head of the injured which he tried to avoid by raising his hands. In that process, he sustained defence wounds. The injuries on the injured are substantiated by medical evidence of doctor PW 5. There were five incised wounds including incised wounds on the hands and legs and there was one CLW over occipital region having dimension 3x1 cm. Definitely, it was a deadly assault on the injured which could have resulted in his death also. But due to the shout raised by his son, aged about seven years, the assailants fled away when the injured felled in the gutter by the side of the road after receiving severe bleeding injuries.

¶21

3 Though it is argued on behalf of the applicants that the assailant who assaulted on the head by means of sword gave only one blow and did not assault more, this cannot be considered as a circumstance in his favour when the assault is by many people

¶22

1/3

¶23

902-APPA-659-15.odt

¶24

3/3

¶25

including the present applicants on the injured and when the applicants are armed with swords and other weapons and determined to do away with the injured. In any event, it is not the case in which

¶26

during pendency of the appeal, the applicants/appellants can be released on bail. Hence, application for bail is dismissed and disposed of.

¶27

1/3

Sachin @ Gopinath Bhagwan Dhumal and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin @ Gopinath Bhagwan Dhumal and Ors. 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

Sameer Vasant Shigwan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhimrao Jagannath Koli Vs the State of Maharashtra

Munaf Mohd. Qureshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sachin @ Gopinath Bhagwan Dhumal and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prakash Chandru Butani Vs Jaiprakash G. Hasija and Anr.

Ravi Yellianna Pujari Vs the State of Maharashtra