The High Court allowed bail to the accused in a Section 396 IPC murder case. Finding no cogent evidence of complicity beyond the Test Identification Parade, the judge held that the applicant had made out a case for bail and ordered his release.
The applicant shall be released on bail by executing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties.
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.
BA-284-2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.284 OF 2021
AJAY MARUTI NIKAM
)...APPLICANT
V/s.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
)...RESPONDENT
Mr.Aniket Nikam i/b. Mr.Vivek Arote, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr.H.J.Dedhia, APP for the Respondent – State.
CORAM : V. G. BISHT, J.
RESERVED ON : 17th NOVEMBER 2021
PRONOUNCED ON : 25th NOVEMBER 2021
P.C.:
1The present application has been moved by the
applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in
Crime No.I-49 of 2019 registered with Police Station Yeola
Taluka, Nashik, for offence punishable under Section 396 of the
Indian Penal Code (IPC).
AVK 1/6
Digitally signed byARTI ARTI VILAS VILAS KHATATE KHATATE Date: 2021.11.25 15:05:39 +0530
BA-284-2021.doc
2The prosecution story in short is that the informant
was employed with one GadePatil, owner of Stone crusher.
Similarly, informant’s father Tulshiram Surase (deceased for
short) was also employed as a watchman there. On 27th March
2019 the deceased as usual had gone for his duty but did not
return. Therefore, the informant visited the stone crusher center
and spotted footwear of his father near the ten wheeler truck
bearing Registration No.MH-15-BJ-7895. The informant also
peeped inside the cabin of said truck and found his father dead
with his legs tied with white coloured plastic tag and his hands
with saffron coloured cloth. The deceased had also sustained
injuries. Later on, the informant came to know that the accused
persons killed his father and committed theft in respect of Tata
Company Dumper from the spot. Accordingly, First Information
Report (FIR) came to be lodged.
3 Mr.Aniket Nikam, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the case of prosecution is based on circumstantial AVK 2/6
BA-284-2021.doc
evidence. There is absolutely no evidence to establish that either
the applicant was seen in the company of the deceased or
anything is recovered at his instance. The only evidence is that
he was identified in the Test Identification Parade but that is not
sufficient to connect the applicant with the offence. In such
circumstances, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.
4Mr.Dedhia, learned APP, on the other hand, submits
that the applicant was duly identified in the Test Identification
Parade. Except that, the learned APP also fairly submits that, no
recovery has been made at the instance of the applicant, and
therefore, appropriate order may be passed.
5 Perused the investigation papers and the statement of prosecution witnesses. From the statement of Govind Tulshiram Surase it appears that on 26th March 2019, he along with other labours, namely, Sachin Ratan Aher, Sanjay Prabhakar Wagh, Bharat Prabhakar Wagh and the owner of Crusher, namely, Kunal Sudam Kadam were chitchatting in between 5.30 p.m. to 6.00 AVK 3/6
BA-284-2021.doc
p.m. A red coloured motorcycle came. There were three persons
in it. They came up to the stone crusher, turned the motorcycle
and without uttering a word went away towards Khamgaon
village. It may be noted that here out of the above said persons,
Kunal Sudam Kadam identified the applicant in the Test
Identification Parade. Similar is the statement of Kunal Sudam
Kadam.
6As already noted, except the said Test Identification
Parade, there is nothing on record to suggest that the applicant
was in any manner involved in the alleged offence. No cogent
and convincing material is forthcoming to establish atleast prima
facie, the complicity of the accused-applicant in the offence.
7For the aforesaid reasons, I hold that the applicant
has made out a case for bail. Hence, I pass the following order :
ORDER
(i)Applicant – Ajay Maruti Nikam shall be released on bail in
Crime No.I-49 of 2019 registered with Police Station Yeola
AVK 4/6
BA-284-2021.doc
Taluka, Nashik, on his executing P.R.Bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in like amount.
(ii)The applicant shall not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(iii)The applicant shall co-operate in expeditious disposal of the
case.
(iv)Bail before the trial Court.
(v)Parties to act on copy of this order duly authenticated by theSheristedar of this Court.(vi)It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima
facie and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own
merit, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the
observations made in this order.
AVK 5/6
BA-284-2021.doc
(vii)The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and stands
disposed off accordingly.
(V. G. BISHT, J.)
AVK 6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant made out a prima facie case for bail given circumstantial evidence and lack of recovery.
Whether the Test Identification Parade identification alone is sufficient to establish complicity in the offence.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
AJAY MARUTI NIKAM
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
V. G. BISHT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court