Allowed

Omkar @ Chikya Sham Phatak v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Jun 2019BA/535/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application before the High Court of Bombay, Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction, the court granted relief after finding the prosecution evidence extremely weak. The recovery of the weapon was deemed unreliable as the location was accessible to all and the blood trace was inclusive, failing Section 27 requirements. Consequently, the applicant was ordered released on bail with sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on executing a Personal Recognizance bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties, with conditions to attend trial and not tamper with evidence.

Omkar @ Chikya Sham Phatak Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1 33-BA 535-19.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.535 OF 2019

¶5

Mr. Omkar @ Chikya Sham Phatak. ] … Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra. ] … Respondent

¶8

Ms. Shubhangi Parulekar for Applicant. Mr. S. H. Yadav , APP for State.

¶9

CORAM :- SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE :- 04 JUNE, 2019

¶10

P. C. :-

¶11

The Applicant is seeking bail in connection with C.R.No.36

¶12

of 2018 registered with Paud Police Station, District Pune, under

¶13

Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Sections 4 and 27 of the Indian Arms Act.

¶14

The FIR is lodged by brother of the deceased. The

¶15

first informant Pravin's brother Sachin @ Raju was brutally assaulted with sharp weapons on 02/02/2018 near Rotmalnath Mandir in Village Lavale. The first informant had not seen the incident. He lodged his FIR at around 2.46 a.m. on 03/02/2018. The CCTV

¶16

URS 1 of 3

¶17

2 33-BA 535-19.odt

¶18

footage had captured the incident of assault. However, the chargesheet shows that the assailants were not properly visible in the CCTV footage. Investigation was conducted and the Applicant was arrested on 10/04/2018. Investigation is already over and the charge-sheet is filed. In all 7 accused were arrested including the present Applicant.

¶19

There are 3 eye witnesses to the incident namely Bajrang Kavtike, Bharat Malekar and Atul Garud. Though they had seen the incident, they were not knowing the assailants except one Vishal Takle. Identification Parade is not held and thus, the identity of the assailants is not established during investigation. The only evidence against the present Applicant is that at his instance, a Koyta was recovered on 14/04/2018.

¶20

I have perused the memorandum panchanama recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The statement of the Applicant

¶21

recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act does not mention the place where he had concealed the weapon. The panchanama conducted pursuant to his statement shows that the weapon was taken out from under a cactus bush near Shitole Vasti, Village Lavale.

¶22

URS 2 of 3

¶23

3 33-BA 535-19.odt

¶24

Thus, it can be seen that this recovery is not very reliable in the light of provisions of Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The place from where the weapon was recovered is accessible to all. Secondly, the CA report concerning the weapon, though shows presence of human blood; the blood group is inclusive. Thus, in the entire charge-sheet, the evidence collected against the present Applicant is extremely weak.

¶25

In this view of the matter, the Applicant deserves to be released on bail. Hence, the following order.

¶26

ORDER

¶27

(i) The Applicant be released on bail in connection with C.R.No.36 of 2018 registered with Paud Police Station, District Pune, on his executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶28

(ii) The Applicant shall attend the trial diligently on each date and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶29

(iii) Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶30

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶31

URS 3 of 3

Omkar @ Chikya Sham Phatak v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omkar @ Chikya Sham Phatak 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

Pammi Bhagwan Chaudhary Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kiran Digambar Mane and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arjun Shripati Sonandkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nitin Dharma Gade and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bharat Manik Gade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sagar @ Bhagwan Ambar Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra