This criminal application for bail was dismissed. The applicant, convicted under Section 302 IPC for assaulting a deceased with a stone, was denied bail as his case was distinguished from a co-accused, and not considered fit for bail.
Bail application rejected.
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.
jdk 1 8.cri.appa.711.16.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 711 OF 2016 IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1142 OF 2015
Mazhar Maksud Shaikh
.. Applicant
[Ori. Accused No.2]
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
..Respondent
Mr. D.G.Khamkar Advocate for Applicant Mrs. U.V. Kejriwal A.P.P. for the State
CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATED : JULY 28, 2016
ORAL ORDER [PER SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]:
convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of IPC. The applicant is now seeking bail.
3 It is the prosecution case that on 22.9.2013 at about 7.30 p.m. the applicant along with other accused assaulted deceased Dayanand with stone on the head. There are three
1 of 2
jdk 2 8.cri.appa.711.16.doc
eye witnesses to the incident i.e. PW 1 Shabana, PW 2 Pramod and PW 3 Vasant. All of them have stated that the applicant assaulted the deceased with stone on the head. The postmortem notes show that though the deceased had sustained eight injuries, but the cause of death was due to head injury.
4 The learned advocate for the applicant tried to submit that the co-accused i.e. accused no.1 whose role is similar to that of the applicant, has been granted bail by this Court. However, on going through the order granting bail to coaccused - original accused no.1 Rafiq, it is seen that on entirely different grounds Rafiq has been granted bail. Looking to the said order, it cannot be said that there is any parity with the present applicant.
5 In view of the above facts, we do not think that this is a fit case to grant bail. Application is rejected.
[ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.] [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
kandarkar
2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is fit to be granted bail given the prosecution case of assault with a stone causing death.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mazhar Maksud Shaikh
The State of Maharashtra
V.K. Tahilramani
Mridula Bhaskar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
