Allowed

Anil Balu Tathe v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC14 Feb 2019BA/2421/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to two applicants arrested for murder. The bench held that circumstantial evidence and mobile conversations were insufficient to prove the ingredients of Section 302 IPC. Applicants were ordered released on security bonds with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail executing prompt bond of Rs. 25,000 each with one or more sureties.

Anil Balu Tathe Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ISM

¶2

1 7.2535.18 ba.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2535 OF 2018

¶5

Rani Sharad Salve .....Applicant

¶6

V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra .....Respondent

¶8

WITH CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION 2421 OF 2018

Anil Balu Tathe

…..Applicant

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra …..Respondent

¶13

Mr. Aniket Nikam i/b Mr. Aashish Satpute for the applicant in BA 2535/2018

¶14

Mr. Rameshwar N. Gite for the applicant in BA 2535/18 Smt. J. S. Lohokare APP for the State

¶15

Mr. S. D. Bidgar, Aadgaon Police Station, Nashik City

¶16

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

¶17

DATE : FEBRUARY 14, 2019.

¶18

P.C.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned

¶20

APP.

¶21

2 7.2535.18 ba.doc

¶22

2 On September 23, 2017, both the applicants were arrested in Crime No. 188/2017 registered with Aadgaon Police Station, Nashik for offence punishable under sections 302, 201, 120(B) of Indian Penal Code pursuant to a complaint lodged by one Garibdas alleging murder of his son namely Sharad, married to applicant Rani.

¶23

3 The prosecution case is both these applicants had extra marital relations and as such hatched conspiracy and murdered Sharad.

¶24

4 The case is based on circumstantial evidence viz. discovery of

¶25

the spot and the mobile conversation.

¶26

5 Even if from the mobile conversation a conspiracy could be inferred, there is no material on the record to infer the satisfaction of ingredients of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. That being so, applicants deserve to be released on bail.

¶27

3 7.2535.18 ba.doc

¶28

(A) Applicants be released on bail in Crime No. 188/2017 registered with Aadgaon Police Station, Nashik on executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶29

(B) Applicants shall not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.

¶30

(C) Till framing of charge, applicants shall remain outside the jurisdiction of Aadgaon Police Station but for attending the trial.

¶31

6 Applications stand disposed of.

¶32

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]

Anil Balu Tathe v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Balu Tathe 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

Mohd.Sehmad Hussain Vs Chief Controller of Explosives and 4 Ors. and Hitendra Goyal (Applicant)

Riyaz Ahmad Hussain Shaikh @ Bhaiji Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ravirajan Pandayan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jagruti Jayant Mehta @ Jayshree and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kunal Dinkar Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahesh Baburao Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra