In a bail application under Sections 302, 304 etc. of IPC, the court rejected the plea for release, holding that despite the release of a similarly placed co-accused, the specific eye-witness statements incriminating the applicant negate the case for bail.
Bail application rejected; Applicant stands arrested.
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.
1/3 Yadav 909.ba.147.19
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 147 OF 2019
Satish Madhukar Padekar … Applicant
Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent
Mr. Aaditya A Gore for Applicant.
Mr. N. B. Patil, APP for Respondent – State.
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. DATE : JANUARY 17, 2019.
P.C. :
. In Crime No. 89 of 2018 for an offence punishable under
Sections 302, 341, 324, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code
the Applicant is seeking regular bail. The Applicant is arrested on 13th April 2018.
already filed;
2/3 Yadav 909.ba.147.19
As such, a prayer for release of the Applicant on bail is made by the learned Counsel for Applicant.
4. Considered rival submissions.
similar allegations were made was ordered to be released on bail, however, it appears that the statement of eye-witnesses namely, Santosh Hulwale, Smt. Varsha Santosh Hulwale, Mayuresh Santosh Hulwale and
3/3 Yadav 909.ba.147.19
Sunil Dagadu Hulwale were not brought to the notice of the Court while dealing with an issue as regards non-identification in Test Identification Parade. The eye-witnesses have specifically named the Applicant as one who was present on the spot of the incident and actively participated in the assault resulting into the death of one of the victim.
Application stands rejected.
(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail in murder case be granted when co-accused in similar circumstances was released.
Whether statement of eye-witnesses naming the applicant negates non-identification in T.I.P.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satish Madhukar Padekar
State of Maharashtra
Nitin W. Sambre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
