Application for regular bail dismissed as applicant assaulted complainant on the head with a sickle. Court found prima facie proof of intention to cause death and risk of fleeing as two accused are absconding.
Bail application rejected; applicant directed to remain in judicial custody pending trial.
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.
1/4 35 BA-116-20.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.116 OF 2020
Mandira Salgaonkar
Digitally signed by Mandira Salgaonkar Date: 2020.12.09 20:31:06 +0530
Akash Gholap..Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
…
Mr.Vikas Shivarkar for the Applicant.
Mr.S.V.Gavand, APP for the State.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J. DATED : 2nd DECEMBER, 2020
P.C:-
1.The present application is filed under Section 439 of
Cr.P.C. seeking a regular bail by the applicant, who is arraigned
as accused No.2 in C.R.No.157 of 2019 registered at Chinchwad
Police Station, Pune on 5th April, 2019. The said C.R. invoke
Sections 307, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 4 read with 25 of the Arms Act alongwith Section 37(1)
read with 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. The applicant was
arrested on 9th April, 2019 and his application seeking bail was
rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune on 3rd
December, 2019.
2. Heard Mr.Vikas Shivarkar for the applicant and learned APP Mr.Gavand for the State.
M.M.Salgaonkar
2/4 35 BA-116-20.doc
3.The learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently
argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the
prosecution and since the investigation is complete and the
charge-sheet is filed, there is no reason why he should languish
in jail when “Bail is the rule and Jail is an exception”.
4.One Ganesh Narayan Londhe is the informant and while
he was admitted in the hospital, he informed that on 4th April,
2019 at about 9.30 p.m., he was proceeding towards his home.
At that time, one Ganesh Gholap, Akash Gholap (applicant) and
Sumit Lavhe intercepted him. Ganesh shouted in an abusive
language that the complainant should not be left alive. He was
pulled out of his vehicle and the accused persons started
assaulting him. The complainant then stated that Akash
assaulted him by means of a sickle in his hand and he sustained
a bleeding injury on his head. Thereafter Sumit also assaulted
him in his head by a sharp weapon. He allege that he was
beaten constantly and as a result, he fell to the ground. Some
bystanders came to his rescue and he was taken to the hospital.
5.Perused the injury certificate of the complainant. He was
examined on 25th April, 2019 at 9.30 p.m. and following
injuries are noted.
“1.6cm long CLW over Right Parietal region, bone deep underlying fracture palpable;M.M.Salgaonkar
3/4 35 BA-116-20.doc
2.7cm long CLW over Left Parieto temporal region bone deep;3.3cm long CLW over right frontal region bone deep;4.6cm long CLW over right occipital region bone deep;5.3cm long CLW over chin subcutaneous;6.4cm long CLW over left eyebrow subcutaneous”6.Injury Nos.1 to 4 are on the head. The complainant came
to be discharged on 9th April, 2019. On the basis of the said
injuries, offence under Section 307 has been invoked against
the present applicant. He is attributed the role of hitting the
complainant in his head. Any act done with an intention or
knowledge that if by that act, death would be caused, a person
would be guilty of murder and it is made punishable under
Section 307 with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine;
and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender
shall be liable either to imprisonment for life or upto ten years.
For the purposes of Section 307, it is not essential that the
bodily injury capable of causing death should be inflicted. If
the intention is to cause death and if there is a knowledge that
such an act would result into death, Section 307 get attracted.
In this case, the assault is in the head, a vital portion of the
body, by means of a sickle, lead to prima facie inference that
the applicant possess both-intention and knowledge. Whether
it would entail punishment of imprisonment for term, which
M.M.Salgaonkar
4/4 35 BA-116-20.doc
may extend to ten years or imprisonment for life, is the matter
of trial. The applicant has assaulted the complainant, which
resulted into injuries on his head mentioned above. The
intention and knowledge to commit the offence is prima facie
established in the form of the material contained in the charge-
sheet. The applicant do not deserve to be released on bail. It is
pertinent to note that his three applications have been rejected
on the ground that the applicant gave blows of deadly weapon
on the head of the complainant. The two other accused in the
said crime are absconding. There is every chance that the
present applicant will also flee away from the course of justice
once released on bail. The application is, therefore, rejected.
SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J
M.M.Salgaonkar
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant deserves release on bail in a case involving an attempt to murder by attacking a vital part of the head with a deadly weapon.
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Akash Gholap
The State of Maharashtra
Bharati Dangre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court