Allowed

Raju Madhukar Bhosale (Intervener) v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC26 Oct 2015APPP/715/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge bail court enlarged applicant on bail in murder case where applicant was not named in FIR but alleged to have delivered a motorcycle used in offence. Applicant granted bail subject to bond and conditions but observations deemed prima facie. Related intervention application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail on PR Bond of Rs. 15,000/- with sureties subject to conditions including appearance at police station and cooperation with trial.

Raju Madhukar Bhosale (Intervener) Vs the State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

ba.1144.15.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1144 OF 2015

¶3

Yogesh Ashok Mane ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶4

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 715 OF 2015 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1144 OF 2015

¶6

Raju Madhukar Bhosale ...Intervener

¶7

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :

¶8

Yogesh Ashok Mane ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶9

Mr. Ashok P. Mundargi with Ms. Shradha Sawant for the Applicant

¶10

Ms. S. D. Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent-State

¶11

Mr. Madhukar Janardan Bhosale on behalf of the Complainant

¶12

Dy. S.P Mr. T. L. Kakade from Akluj Police Station is present

¶13

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. MONDAY, 26TH OCTOBER, 2015

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant. Mr. Madhukar

¶16

Janardan Bhosale is present on behalf of the complainant. The Counsel for

¶17

the complainant is absent. Heard learned A.P.P for the State at length.

1/5

SQ Pathan

ba.1144.15.doc

By this application, the applicant seeks his enlargement on bail in connection with C.R. No. 229 of 2014 registered with the Akluj Police Station, Solapur, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148, 149, 120B, 201 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

The incident in question has taken place on 20^th November, 2014 at about 7:45 p.m. It is alleged by the complainant Raju Bhosale that when he was passing through Vijay Chowk, he saw Pravin Bhosale, Ganesh Bhosale, Sadashiv Bhosale and five to six unknown persons assaulting his cousin Rahul Bhosale with sticks, sickles and swords. Pursuant to the said assault, the deceased succumbed to the said injuries on the spot.

¶23

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not been named in the FIR and nor is he amongst the 5 to 6 unknown persons mentioned in the FIR. He submits that the only allegation qua the applicant is that a pulsar motorcycle which was used in the commission of the offence was picked up by him from Sagar and

2/5

SQ Pathan

ba.1144.15.doc

delivered to Kunal. He further submits that apart from the said material, there is no other material to connect the applicant with the alleged offence.

¶28

Learned A.P.P submitted that although the applicant has not been named in the FIR, nevertheless, it is revealed in the course of the investigation, that the applicant was aware of the incident and had abetted the accused in the commission of the offence. She relied on the statement of Sagar Gorve to show that the applicant had picked up the Pulsar motorcycle from him and delivered it to Kunal. On instructions, she states that there are no antecedents qua the applicant.

¶29

Perused the charge-sheet. Admittedly, the applicant has not been named in the FIR nor is he alleged to be amongst the 4 to 5 unknown persons mentioned in the FIR. The role alleged against the present applicant is that he picked up the motorcycle after the commission of the offence from Sagar and delivered it to Kunal. Perused the statement of Sagar Gorve. According to the said statement, the applicant is stated to have taken the said vehicle after two days i.e. on 22^nd November, 2014

3/5

SQ Pathan

ba.1144.15.doc

from him and delivered it to Kunal thereafter. Investigation is complete and

¶34

charge-sheet is filed. There are no antecedents qua the applicant.

¶35

Considering the nature of allegations and the role of the applicant in the present case, the applicant is enlarged on bail on the following terms and conditions :

¶36

ORDER

¶37

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the

¶38

sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶39

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on the first Saturday of every month from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. for a period of 12 months from the date of his release;

¶40

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

¶41

(iv) The applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and

¶42

mobile contact number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the

4/5

SQ Pathan

ba.1144.15.doc

Court seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station;

¶47

(v) The applicant to cooperate with the conduct of the trial;

¶48

(vi) If there is a breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of the applicant's bail.

¶49

The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶50

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie, and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶51

In view of the above order, the intervention application being Criminal Application No. 715 of 2015 does not survive. The same stands disposed of accordingly.

¶52

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶53

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶54

5/5

¶55

SQ Pathan

Raju Madhukar Bhosale (Intervener) v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Madhukar Bhosale (Intervener) 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

Sagar Bhagwat Shingade and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajesh Nathuram Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ramji Kanji Vs the State

Ravindra Ganpatrao Shendge Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yogesh Ashok Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kamil Mustafa Shaikh @ Raju Bhai Vs the State of Maharashtra