Allowed

Baban Datta Gaikwad v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Apr 2017APPA/554/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the High Court examined the prosecution witnesses regarding an FIR under Section 302 IPC. The Court found the witnesses' evidence unreliable and insufficient to connect the applicant to the killing by burning. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the applicant.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Baban Datta Gaikwad was released on bail by paying Rs. 40,000 with one or two sureties.

Baban Datta Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

1 Cr.Appln.554/2017-Cr. Appeal.331/2017(14)

¶2

mnm

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 554 OF 2017 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 331 OF 2017

¶6

Baban Datta Gaikwad ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶7

Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal, Advocate for the Appellant Mr. H.J. Dedia, A.P.P. for the State

¶8

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, &

¶9

M.S. KARNIK, JJ. DATED :19^TH APRIL, 2017

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

Heard both sides.

¶12

The Applicant has been convicted under Section 302 of the

¶13

Indian Penal Code for causing the death of Puja by setting her on

¶14

fire. The Applicant is now seeking bail.

¶15

According to the prosecution there are two eye witnesses in

¶16

this case i.e. P.W. No.2 Sanyukta Balaji Bansode and P.W. No.3 Mayuri Balaji Bansode. Both Sanyukta and Mayuri were the

¶17

2 Cr.Appln.554/2017-Cr. Appeal.331/2017(14) daughters of deceased Puja. As far as Mayuri is concerned she was not in the house when the incident took place. She has stated that she saw smoke coming out of her house, therefore, she rushed home. When she went inside the house she saw that her mother had caught fire and the Applicant was pushing her mother towards the wall. However, the cross examination of this witness shows that her averments in her examination-in-chief that the Applicant was pushing Puja towards the wall is an improvement, thus, it cannot be taken into consideration.

¶18

The second witness on which reliance is placed by the prosecution is P.W. No.2 Sanyukta who was the daughter of the deceased. Sanyukta has stated in her examination-in-chief that she was playing outside the house. The Applicant poured kerosene on her mother and set her on fire with a matchstick. However, in the cross examination of this witness she has admitted that while she was playing outside suddenly the stove exploded and due to flames her mother shouted. She has further stated that the Applicant tried to douse the fire due to which his palms were burnt. Thereafter the Applicant took her mother in an autorikshaw to the hospital. Thus,

¶19

3 Cr.Appln.554/2017-Cr. Appeal.331/2017(14)

¶20

we find that there is no reliable evidence which connects the Applicant to the death of Puja. The evidence of P.W. Nos. 2 and 3 and the other evidence does not show beyond reasonable doubt that the Applicant set Puja on fire. Thus, we are inclined to grant bail to the Applicant. Hence, we pass the following order:

¶21

The Applicant Baban Datta Gaikwad be released on bail in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with one or two sureties to make up the said amount and P.R. Bond of like amount.

¶22

During the period that the Applicant is on bail, he shall report to the Jodbhavi Peth Police Station, Solapur once in fortnight.

¶23

The Application is allowed in above terms.

¶24

(M.S. KARNIK, J.) (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.)

Baban Datta Gaikwad v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baban Datta Gaikwad 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

Mukhtar Tayyab Kazi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Narendra Lalmani Giri Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Haseena @ Sultana Fakir Kazi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shri. Vijaykumar Pandharirao Narwade Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan Vs State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Hanmant Bhagwat Garad Vs the State of Maharashtra