Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Bhagyashree Ramanand Bhole vs The State Of Maharashtra on 14 September, 2021

Bench: V.K. Jadhav, Shrikant D. Kulkarni

                               1                 12-CRI.APPEAL-1330-2021

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                 12 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1330 OF 2021
                       IN CRIMINAL APPEAL/145/2021

                   BHAGYASHREE RAMANAND BHOLE
                                    VERSUS
                      THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                        ...
            Advocate for Applicant : Mr Shailendra S. Gangakhedkar
             APP for Respondent-State: Mr Rajendra V. Dasalkar


                               CORAM : V.K. JADHAV AND
                                       SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
                                   DATE   : 14th SEPTEMBER, 2021


 PER COURT :

 1.           Pending Criminal Appeal No. 145 of 2021 preferred against the

 judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

 Nanded dated 10.02.2021 in Sessions case No.90/2016 convicting the

 applicant/original accused No. 2 for having committed the offence

 punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of I.P.C. and

 sentencing her to suffer R.I. for life and pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to

 suffer S.I. for six months, the applicant/original accused No.2 has

 preferred this application for suspension of substantive part of the

 sentence and for bail.


 2.           The learned counsel for the applicant/accused No. 2 submits

 that the prosecution case rests upon two dying declarations Exh.59 and

 Exh. 85 respectively. The learned counsel submits that Exh.85 came to be

 recorded by PW 8 P.S.I. Mr G.J. Kshirsagar and Exh. 59 came to be

 recorded by Special Judicial Magistrate PW 4 - Mohd. Iftekhar Mohiuddin.




::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2021                       ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2021 00:25:13 :::
                                2               12-CRI.APPEAL-1330-2021

 The learned counsel submits that there is mark inconsistency between

 these two dying declarations. The learned counsel submits that it appears

 from the allegations made in both dying declarations, so also, from the

 evidence of PW 1, who claims himself to be the witness rushed to the spot

 immediately after the incident, the said incident has taken place without

 any premeditation as of sudden in the heat of anger. The learned counsel

 submits that even though, the applicant/original accused            No. 2 was

 allegedly present at the time of incident, however, the entire role was

 ascribed to accused No.1. The learned counsel submits that it is not clear

 from the prosecution evidence that the applicant/accused No.2 had

 knowledge that the co-accused was having the knife in his possession and

 he was likely to use the said knife in the quarrel, which has taken place as

 of sudden. The learned counsel submits that even it appears from the

 prosecution evidence that there was no intention to commit murder as

 such. The deceased Parmeshwar died 12 days after the incident and the

 cause of death is septicaemia in an operated case of stab injury to

 abdomen. The learned counsel submits that the applicant/original accused

 No.2 was on bail during trial.


 3.           The learned A.P.P. submits that there were illicit sexual

 relations between the applicants and even on one previous occasion, the

 deceased along with some other residents of the area seen co-accused

 Dhananjay when he had allegedly entered in the           house of applicant/

 accused No. 2. The learned A.P.P. submits that since then, the applicant

 had a grudge against the deceased Parmeshwar and in consequence

 thereof, the incident had taken place. Both the dying declarations are




::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2021 00:25:13 :::
                                3                   12-CRI.APPEAL-1330-2021

 consistent on material part. PW          1 - Dhammapal Sheshrao Kamble

 happened to be the real brother of the deceased Parmeshwar rushed to

 the spot after the incident and had witnessed that both the accused were

 dragging      the    deceased.    The   learned   A.P.P.    submits       that    the

 applicant/accused No.2 may not be released on bail by suspending the

 substantive part of sentence.


 4.           It appears that the prosecution case mainly rests upon the two

 dying declarations. So far as the dying declaration Exh.59 recorded by the

 Special Judicial Magistrate, no specific act was ascribed to the

 applicant/accused No.2 as against the dying declaration Exh. 85 recorded

 by    PW 8 PSI G.J. Kshirsagar. Apart from this, it appears from the

 prosecution evidence that the incident had taken place without any

 premeditation as of sudden. We do not find any evidence suggesting that

 the present applicant/original accused No.2 had knowledge that the co-

 accused was having knife in his possession and he was likely to use the

 said knife in the incident which allegedly taken place as of sudden without

 any premeditation. It further appears that the co-accused Dhananjay as of

 sudden took out the knife and inflicted blows of the knife on the person of

 the deceased. Furthermore, co-accused had pushed deceased in such a

 manner that the deceased dashed against the standing pole and

 sustained injuries on his head. Furthermore, the cause of death is

 septicaemia in an operated case of stab injury to abdomen and the

 applicant/accused No. 2 was on bail during the trial. Thus, considering the

 entire aspect of the case, we are inclined to release the applicant/accused

 No. 2 on bail by suspending the substantive part of the sentence. Hence,




::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2021                       ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2021 00:25:13 :::
                                4                 12-CRI.APPEAL-1330-2021

 the following order :-


                                   ORDER

(I) The criminal application is hereby allowed. (II) Pending the Criminal Appeal No. 145/2021 preferred against the Judgment and order of conviction passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded dated 10.02.2021 in Sessions Case No. 90/2016, substantive part of the sentence is hereby suspended and till then, the applicant/original accused No. 2 - Bhagyashri Ramanand Bhole be released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount. (III) The criminal application is accordingly disposed of. [ SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. ] [ V.K. JADHAV, J. ] mta ::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2021 00:25:13 :::