Partly allowed

Shriram Laxman Bangar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Apr 2016APPLN/1060/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Aurangabad disposed of an application for bail by three co-accidents in Sessions Case No. 112 of 2013. While rejecting the prayer for the first two applicants, granting bail to the third applicant, a 67-year-old, pending final hearing of their respective appeals.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant no. 3 Laxman on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety; bail rejected for applicants no. 1 and no. 2.

Shriram Laxman Bangar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

{1}

¶2

crappln106016.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1060 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.80 OF 2016

¶5

1 Shriram Laxman Bangar 2 Barku Laxman Bangar 3 Laxman Hariba Bangar

¶6

Applicants

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

Respondent

¶10

Mr.S.J.Salunke, advocate for applicants. Mr.K.S.Patil, APP for Respondent.

¶11

CORAM : R.M.BORDE &

¶12

K.L.WADANE, JJ. DATE : 04th April, 2016

¶13

PER COURT:

¶14

1 This is an application for bail on behalf of the accused involved in Sessions Case No.112 of 2013, decided by Additional Sessions Judge, Beed on 02.02.2016. All the applicants - accused nos.1, 2 and 3 were held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.500/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one year. They were also held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one week.

¶15

2 So far as applicant no.1 Shriram is concerned, prima facie, there appears to be evidence against him in respect of his

¶16

{2}

¶17

crappln106016.odt

¶18

involvement in the alleged crime. Both the eye witnesses, P.W.1 and P.W.2 have stated about the role of Shriram, being the person, who launched assault on the head of the deceased with the help of an axe, which has resulted in the death of the deceased. The case of Shriram for grant of bail, therefore, does not deserve consideration.

¶19

3 So far as applicant no.2 Barku is concerned, though it is contended that in fact he has not played any role in making assault on the deceased, however, considering facts and circumstances of the case, we do not deem it appropriate to consider his claim for grant of bail. We keep an option open to applicant no.2 – Barku to apply for bail after lapse of period of six months.

¶20

4 So far as applicant no.3 Laxman is concerned, it is alleged that he was armed with a stick and no role has been attributed to him in respect of assault on deceased Mahadeo. Considering totality of the circumstances as well as age of Laxman, who is stated to be of 67 years of age, he needs to be enlarged on bail.

¶21

5 For the reasons stated above, the application, so far as applicant no.3 – Laxman is concerned, is allowed. Applicant No.3 – Laxman shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty five thousand) with one surety in the like amount. Bail in the trial Court.

¶22

6 The application for grant of bail, so far as it relates to

¶23

{3} crappln106016.odt

¶24

applicant no.1- Shriram and applicant no.3 Barku, stands rejected.

¶25

7 Office is directed to ensure preparation of paper book within a period of six weeks from today and after preparation of paper book, the appeal shall be listed for final hearing. In the event the appeal does not reach for final hearing after six months, liberty to applicant no.2 – Barku to tender fresh application for bail.

¶26

8 Instant appeal be placed along with Criminal Appeal No.98 of 2016.

¶27

K.L.WADANE R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE

¶28

adb/crappln106016

Shriram Laxman Bangar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shriram Laxman Bangar 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

Vasant Sitaram Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sudhir Haribhau Babar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Urmila W/O Suresh Suryawanshi and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jakir Maheboobkhan Pathan. Vs the State of Maharashtra.

Anil Nana Yelmame Vs State of Maharashtra

Khan Syed Muzafaruddin Mohd Abdul Qayyum Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.