Allowed

Shravan Kashinath Savgave v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC18 Nov 2024BA/4556/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by an accused in a gang murder and MCOC case where his role was limited to assaulting a witness with fists. With no recovery, completed investigation, charge-sheet filed, and a similarly placed co-accused already released, the court granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail in Crime No.75/2019 on PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties, with monthly police attendance and other conditions.

Shravan Kashinath Savgave vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

23-BA-4556-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.4556 OF 2024

¶4

Shravan Kashinath Savgave …. Applicant V/s.

¶5

The State of Maharashtra …. Respondent

¶6

NILAM Digitally signed byNILAM SANTOSH SANTOSH KAMBLE KAMBLE Date: 2024.12.0610:58:24 +0530

¶7

Ms.Shubhangi Parulekar, for the Applicant. Ms.Sangeeta D. Shinde, APP, for Respondent-State.

¶8

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶9

DATE : 4^th DECEMBER 2024

¶10

P.C:-

¶11

. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent-State.

¶12

The learned APP tendered affidavit-in-reply, it is taken

¶13

on record.

¶14

By this application, applicant is seeking bail in Crime No.75 of 2019 registered with Dattawadi Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 324, 201, 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) and under Sections 3(25), 4(25) of the Arms Act, 1959 and under

¶15

N.S. Kamble page 1 of 5

¶16

23-BA-4556-2024.doc

¶17

Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act, 1999 (for short “MCOC”).

¶18

It is prosecution’s case that, on 13^th January, 2019 at about 6:00 p.m. complainant and his friends namely Nilesh Wadkar, Amol Kadam, Ganesh Jadhav, Hrishikesh Chavan, Sujeet Badambe, were proceedings from Jay Bhavani Nagar via Yallamma Mandir to Kande Ali. On their way they came across Sunil Dokephode @ Chocolate Sunya, Navnath Valhekar, Yogesh Jambhale, Abhijeet Kadu, Avinash Devkule, Nitin Metkari, Sameer Natekat @ Kala Dadya, Akshay Ambawale, Shubham, Rakesh Shimpi, Sohali Shaikh, Saurabh Adhav, Raj Adhav, Pappu Gaikwad, Atish Mali. On account of previous enmity/rivalry between the two groups and as the complainant’s group opposed the accused’s group from collecting extortion money in that area, on that count the accused persons by entering into pre-planned criminal conspiracy, by firing from gun and also by assaulting with the means of sickle and by fists and blows caused the death of Nilesh Wadkar and attempted to cause the murder of Amol Kadam, Ganesh Jadhav, Sujit Badambe and fled away, thereafter the complainant lodged the complaint with Dattawadi Police Station.

¶19

N.S. Kamble page 2 of 5

¶20

23-BA-4556-2024.doc

¶21

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that,

¶22

the role attributed to the applicant in the first information is that, he had beaten the eye witness Amol Kadam with fist and blows. Except these allegations there are no allegations against the applicant. The learned counsel further submits that there is no antecedents of the applicant. There is no recovery at the instance of the applicant. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. Th learned counsel further submitted that co-accused Raj @ Rajesh Raosaheb Aadhav has been released on bail. The role attributed to the present applicant is lesser than co-accused Raj @ Rajesh Raosaheb Aadhav. Hence, requested to allow the application.

¶23

It is contention of learned APP that, applicant was member of syndicate crime. There was rivalry between two gangs and out of that rivalry deceased was murdered by the gang of applicant. Applicant was present at the time of incident, he participated in assault on deceased, it shows his involvement in crime. If applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.

¶24

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused FIR and charge-sheet.

¶25

N.S. Kamble page 3 of 5

¶26

23-BA-4556-2024.doc

¶27

The allegations against the applicant are that, he beaten

¶28

the injured witness Amol Kadam with fist and blows. The statements of eye witness also shows same allegations against the applicant. The death of deceased is caused due to hemorrhage and shock due to multiple chop injuries. There is no recovery at the instance of the applicant. Applicant is behind bar more than five years. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. The co-accused Raj @ Rajesh Raosaheb Aadhav has been released on bail.

¶29

Considering the above facts, applicant’s further detention is not required.

¶30

In view of above, I pass following order.

¶31

ORDER

¶32

(i) Application is allowed.

¶33

(ii) The Applicant-Shravan Kashinath Savgave be released on bail in Crime No.75 of 2019 registered with Dattawadi Police Station, Pune, on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶34

(iii) The Applicant shall attend the concerned police station once in a month i.e. on first Saturday

¶35

N.S. Kamble page 4 of 5

¶36

23-BA-4556-2024.doc

¶37

between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. till framing of charge.

¶38

(iv) The Applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and mobile number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Investigating Officer.

¶39

(v) The Applicant shall attend the Court dates regularly.

¶40

(vi) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

¶41

The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶42

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this

¶43

order.

¶44

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶45

N.S. Kamble page 5 of 5

Shravan Kashinath Savgave v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shravan Kashinath Savgave 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd.Thr.Its.Csc Head Mr.N K Arvindkumar Vs Smt.Anitaben Manojbhai Patel and Ors.

Cholamandalam M.S. General Isurance Co. Ltd. Thr. Its Manager, Neha S. Hake vs Kum. Simran Arif Pathan (Minor) and Ors.

Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Co. Ltd. Thr. Its Manager, Neha S. Hake vs Kum. Simran Arif Pathan (Minor) and Ors.

Sou.Kamal Vishnu Shendge vs Shri.Sayyad Dastagir Honmurgi and Ors.

Shriram Dinkarrao Deshmukh and Ors. vs the Divisional Controller, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Nashik

Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Companylimited vs Dhanashri Charan Patil and Ors.