This criminal application was rejected regarding bail for an applicant convicted of murder under IPC Section 302. The High Court also granted an oral order to expedite the final hearing of the principal criminal appeal.
Bail application rejected; hearing of the appeal expedited to the board commencing from 24th October, 2016.
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.
7. cri appa 96016.doc
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 960 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 745 OF 2013
Gunvant Rohidas Bansode
.. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
.. Respondent
Appearances
Ms. Rashmi Tendulkar Samant Advocate (appointed) for the Applicant Mr. H.J. Dedia APP for the State
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATE : AUGUST 22, 2016.
ORAL ORDER [PER MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.] :
convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, simple imprisonment
for six months, by Judgment and Order dated 14.3.2011 in
Sessions Case No. 137 of 2009 passed by the learned
Sessions Judge, Raigad-Alibag. The applicant is now seeking
jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 4
7. cri appa 96016.doc
bail.
there is no eye witness to the incident and the conviction is based only on circumstantial evidence which is also not reliable. She has submitted that there is allegation of theft of ornaments by the applicant when he committed theft and at
the time of theft, the applicant committed the murder of one Sunita, however, the evidence of recovery cannot be believed because no ornaments were recovered from the dustbin at the instance of the applicant. She submitted that considering the quality of evidence, the applicant be released on bail.
Perused the evidence of material witnesses i.e PW 1 Mohan
who is the complainant and PW 2 Anandsing Ravat, the
jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 4
7. cri appa 96016.doc
servant working in the house of the deceased at the relevant time. The applicant had visited the house of the deceased earlier days and had demanded money. We have also perused the evidence of PW 8 Ayesha Shaikh, the rag-picker. The police have recovered the ornaments from her daughter Munni at Hyderabad with whom she had kept the ornaments. The ornaments were identified by PW 4 Manish,
the son of the deceased in the Court. The postmortem notes disclosed that deceased Sunita died due to hemorrhage due to multiple injuries.
to grant bail, hence, the application is rejected.
are ready and the applicant has been in custody since 2009,
jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 4
7. cri appa 96016.doc
the appeal be placed on the final hearing board in the week
commencing from 24th October, 2016.
[ MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj
4 of 4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant, already convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, should be granted bail.
Whether there is a need to expedite the hearing of the appeal pending before the Court.
Gunvant Rohidas Bansode
The State of Maharashtra
V.K. Tahilramani
Mridula Bhatkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
