Bombay High Court
Rushikesh Ramdas Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra on 4 February, 2019
Author: Prakash D. Naik
Bench: Prakash D. Naik
Sknair 7-ba-518-18.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 518 OF 2018
Rushikesh Ramdas Patil ... Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 298 OF 2018
IN
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 518 OF 2018
Abhijit Pradip Khandagale ... Intervenor.
In the matter between
Rushikesh Ramdas Patil ... Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
...
Mr. M.S. Mohite a/w Mr. Akshay Goswami & Mr. Hemal Patel I/by
G.M.S. Legal for the applicant.
Mr. Aniket Nikam I/by Mr. Aashish Stapute for the intervenor.
Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 4th FEBRUARY, 2019.
P.C.
1. This is an application for bail under Section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure in connection with CR No. I-475 of 2016
registered with Narpoli Police Station for the offence punishable
1 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 07/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 00:06:12 :::
Sknair 7-ba-518-18.odt
under Sections 302, 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 120(B), 201 of
Indian Penal Code alongwith Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2) & 3(4) of
Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 alongwith
Sections 37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act. First
Information Report was lodged on 24th October, 2016.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24 th October, 2016, the
complainant was informed that deceased Bunti Khandagale is
assaulted by knife and he was lying in front of Shankar Temple
and hence he rushed at the said place. Injured was not found at
the said place and hence he rushed to the hospital. He found that
injured had sustained injuries on his head, fore-head, right arm,
elbow, abdomen and chest. Injured was the brother of the
complainant. On inquiries the injured disclosed that he was
assaulted by Akshay N. Patil and Bharat and they have also
snatched the gold chain and gold ring. First Information Report
was lodged on the same day.
3. During the course of investigation it was revealed that
Akshay Patil is head of gang. He has created terror in the village.
Several cases are registered against him. He has several
2 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 07/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 00:06:12 :::
Sknair 7-ba-518-18.odt
associates. Statement of several witnesses were recorded. It is the
case of prosecution that there was enmity between the
complainant's family and applicant, as deceased had defeated the
father of the applicant in election. During the course of
investigation, statement of eye witnesses were recorded. In the
said statement they disclosed that the applicant was present at the
scene of offence and was instigating the assailants to liquidate the
deceased. The provisions of MCOC were applied. After
investigation, chargesheet was filed. Applicant was arrested on 9 th
January, 2017.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant
has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant's involvement is
not disclosed in the first information report. Injured has referred
the names of two persons as assailants. It is further submitted that
injured was taken to the hospital wherein aforesaid disclosure was
made which is being treated as dying declaration. It is submitted
that eye witnesses were also present at the hospital and they did
not disclose the involvement of the applicant immediately to the
complainant before registration of FIR which itself indicates that
applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further
3 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 07/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 00:06:12 :::
Sknair 7-ba-518-18.odt
submitted that presence of the applicant was disclosed on the
statements which were recorded after registration of the First
Information Report. Prosecution has relied upon the motive of
political enmity to show the involvement of the applicant.
However, there is every possibility that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case on account of enmity. Confessional
statement of the accused recorded during the course of
investigation does not show that the applicant was present at any
point of time while hatching conspiracy. The applicant is in
custody from the date of arrest and only role which has been
attributed to him is to instigate the assailants.
5. Learned APP and learned counsel for the intervenor submits
that there is sufficient evidence against the applicant. There are
eye witnesses to the incident to show the participation of the
applicant in the crime. Supplementary statement of the
complainant was recorded which shows the involvement of the
applicant as one of the participant in the crime. Statement of the
witnesses were also recorded under Section 164 of Code of
Criminal Procedure which also shows the complicity of the
applicant in the crime. It is further submitted that the applicant
4 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 07/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 00:06:12 :::
Sknair 7-ba-518-18.odt
has antecedents and the said crime was committed with the gang
leader who had participated in assaulting the deceased in the
present case. It is therefore submitted that there is sufficient
evidence against the applicant and he is not entitled for bail.
6. I have perused the chargesheet. Prosecution case is that
there was enmity between the applicant and the complainant's
family. The enmity is spelt out in the statement recorded during
the investigation. Prosecution is relying upon the statement of eye
witnesses recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of Code of
Criminal Procedure. As noted above, the contention of the
applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in this case, as his
name is not appearing in the first information report and his
involvement is not discloses immediately. However, on perusal of
the statement of the witnesses as well as supplementary statement
of the complainant it is apparent that the applicant was present at
the scene of offence and was instigating the assailants to liquidate
the deceased. Supplementary statement also discloses the
involvement of the applicant. The confessional statement was also
recorded under Section 18 of MCOC Act refers to the conspiracy
being hatched by the accused which was followed by the incident
5 of 6
::: Uploaded on - 07/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 00:06:12 :::
Sknair 7-ba-518-18.odt
of murder. At this stage, prima-facie involvement of the applicant
is disclosed.
7. Considering the nature of offence, and evidence no case for
grant of bail is made out and hence application stands rejected.
Hence, I pass the following order.
ORDER
i. Criminal Bail Application No. 518 of 2018 is rejected.
ii. Criminal Application No. 298 of 2018 stands disposed off.
( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. ) 6 of 6 ::: Uploaded on - 07/02/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2019 00:06:12 :::