Bombay High Court
Dnyandeo Punjaji Sabe (Injail) vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Khamgaon, ... on 31 August, 2020
Author: Amit B. Borkar
Bench: Z.A.Haq, Amit B. Borkar
Judgment 1 apeal249.20.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 249 OF 2020
Dnyandeo Punjaji Sabe
Aged about 65 years, Occ.: Nil,
R/o. Kokta, Tq. Khamgaon,
District : Buldana.
.... APPELLANT.
// VERSUS //
1) State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Khamgaon, Buldana.
2) Dilip Namdeo Kalsakar,
Aged about 40 years,
R/o. Gram Matka, Khamgaon,
District : Buldana.
.... RESPONDENTS.
___________________________________________________________________
Shri S.V.Sirpurkar, Advocate for Appellant.
Shri M.K.Pathan, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1/State.
Shri Alok Daga, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
___________________________________________________________________
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ AND AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED : AUGUST 31, 2020.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Amit B. Borkar, J.)
1. Heard.
2. ADMIT.
::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2020 08:19:45 :::
Judgment 2 apeal249.20.odt
3. Heard finally at the stage of admission.
4. This is an appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 challenging the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Khamgaon, District : Buldana, dated 22 nd June, 2020, thereby rejecting the second bail application filed by the appellant mainly on the ground that there is no change in circumstances after rejection of the first bail application of the appellant in connection with Crime No.86 of 2020, registered with Police Station, Khamgaon Rural, District : Buldhana for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 302, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)
(v) & (va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act.
5. We have heard Shri S.V.Sirpurkar, learned Advocate for the appellant, Shri M.K.Pathan, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1 and Shri Alok Daga, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2/Complainant.
6. Shri S.V.Sirpurkar, learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that from the statement of witnesses which are on record there is limited role attributed to the appellant to the extent that the appellant was present at the time of the incident and there is no active participation by the appellant. ::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2020 08:19:45 :::
Judgment 3 apeal249.20.odt
7. Shri M.K.Pathan, learned A.P.P. and Shri Alok Daga, learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2/Complainant submitted that the appellant restrained Deelip Kalaskar who was trying to pacify the appellant. Therefore, there is active participation of the appellant and therefore, prayed that the appellant is not entitled to be released on bail. It is also submitted that there are chances of further clashes between groups of the appellant and the respondent No.2 as there is history of clashes in the two groups of the said village.
8. After having gone through the material on record and especially the statements of witnesses it appears that the relationship between the main assailants and the present appellant is that of father and sons. The appellant is 65 years old.
9. From the statements, it appears that the appellant came at the site of the incident after the quarrel between other assailants and the victim started. The apprehension, which is expressed in the impugned order, regarding chances of further clashes between two communities can be taken care of by imposing appropriate conditions.
::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2020 08:19:45 :::
Judgment 4 apeal249.20.odt
10. Taking into consideration the age of the appellant, absence of antecedents in the discredit of the appellant, investigation is complete, charge-sheet is filed and the prosecution has not been able to point out that further custody of the appellant is required for investigation, we are satisfied that the appellant deserves to be released on bail.
11. We, therefore, pass the following order:
i) The appeal is allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside.
ii) The appellant, having been arrested in connection with Crime No.86 of 2020 registered with respondent No.1 Police Station, is directed to be released on bail on his depositing cash security of Rs.Fifty Thousand in Sessions Court, Khamgaon, District :
Buldana, with two solvent sureties in the like amount.
iii) The appellant shall not enter village Kokta, Tahsil : Khamgaon, District: Buldana till completion of the trial and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor try to contact any person connected with the crime.
::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2020 08:19:45 :::
Judgment 5 apeal249.20.odt
iv) The appellant shall attend each and every date fixed by Special
Judge, Khamgaon, District : Buldana and in case of failure to attend any of the dates the Special Judge, Khamgaon, District :
Buldana shall be entitled to recommend for cancellation of bail of the appellant.
The appeal stands disposed of in the above terms.
(AMIT B. BORKAR, J) (Z.A.HAQ, J)
RRaut..
::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2020 08:19:45 :::