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 10, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Dattatraya Krushna Hande vs The State Of Maharashtra on 14 January, 2020

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

 Sajakali Jamadar                          1 of 6            906-IA-1-2020-BA-3336-2019.doc




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3336 OF 2019

 Ajinath Dnyandeo Hande                                      ...Applicant
       Versus
 The State of Maharashtra                                    ...Respondent

                                      WITH
                     INTERVENTION APPLICATION NO. 01 OF 2020
                                        IN
                    CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3336 OF 2019

 Suryakant Chandrakant Hande                                 ...Applicant
       Versus
 The State of Maharashtra                                    ...Respondent

                                      WITH
                    CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3356 OF 2019

 Dattatraya Krushna Hande                                    ...Applicant
       Versus
 The State of Maharashtra                                    ...Respondent

                                      WITH
                     INTERVENTION APPLICATION NO. 01 OF 2020
                                        IN
                    CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3356 OF 2019

 Suryakant Chandrakant Hande                                 ...Applicant
       Versus
 The State of Maharashtra                                    ...Respondent

                                   .....
 Mr. Ujwal R. Agandsurve, Advocate for the Applicant in Bail
 Application No. 3336 of 2019.
 Mr. Sagar Tambe i/b Mr. Ritesh M. Thobade, for applicant in Bail
 Application No. 3356 of 2019.
 Mr. Jaydeep Mane, Advocate for intervenor in both Bail Applications.
 Mr. S. H. Yadav, APP for the state-respondent in both Bail
 Applications.
                                   .....




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2020                        ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2020 00:26:41 :::
  Sajakali Jamadar                             2 of 6            906-IA-1-2020-BA-3336-2019.doc




                                   CORAM :    PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
                                   DATE :     14th January, 2020
 PC :

 1.        The applicants in both these applications are seeking bail

 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C in C.R. No. 557 of 2019 registered with

 Tembhurni Police Station, Dist. Solapur Rural for offences punishable

 under Sections 302, 307, 114, 143,147, 148, 149, 504 & 506 of

 Indian Penal Code.


 2.        The FIR was lodged by Suryakant Chandrakant Hande who is

 the son of the deceased. The applicant Ajinath Dnyandeo Hande was

 arrested on 5th October, 2019 and Dattatraya Krushna Hande was

 arrested on 29th October, 2019. The prosecution case is that on 5 th

 October, 2019, the accused No.1-Hanmant, accused No. 2-

 Bayadabai, accused No.3- Dattatraya Krushna Hande (applicant),

 accused            No.4   -   Ajinath   Dnyandeo      Hande       (applicant)          and

 accused No.5 - Haridas had participated in the assault. It is alleged

 that the accused Dattatray Hande, Ajinath Hande and Haridas were

 present at the scene of offence. They instigated other accused saying

 that the victim should not be spared. Thereafter, co-accused

 Bayadabai abused him and pelted stones on the tractor. Hanumant

 also abused the father of the complainant. Hanumant chased him.

 Then accused ran towards teen shed and brought axe. Hanumant




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2020                           ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2020 00:26:41 :::
  Sajakali Jamadar                        3 of 6            906-IA-1-2020-BA-3336-2019.doc




 assaulted the father of the complainant with the blow of axe on his

 head. The victim fell down. The accused ran away from the place of

 incident. The FIR was lodged. The Statements of witnesses were

 recorded. On completing investigation, charge-sheet is filed.


 3.        Learned advocate representing both the applicants submitted

 that they have been falsely implicated in this case on account of

 property dispute. No role of assault is assigned to them. The

 applicants had allegedly instigated the co-accused. The co-accused

 Haridas who was attributed similar role has been granted bail by the

 Sessions Court. Statements of two witnesses Bankat Gaikwad and

 Chandrakant Hawalder were recorded belatedly. Their version is

 doubtful. There are no criminal antecedents against the applicants.

 The applicant Dattatray is suffering from paralysis and the requisite

 documents has been annexed to this application.


 4.        Learned APP submitted that the applicants are not entitled to

 bail on the ground of parity, while granting bail to co-accused

 Haridas, the court had taken into consideration his age and ailment

 suffered by him. There is sufficient evidence against the applicants.

 There is motive for the applicants to assault the deceased. They have

 participated in the crime. The act was done in furtherance of

 common intention. The Sessions court which had granted bail to the




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2020                      ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2020 00:26:41 :::
  Sajakali Jamadar                        4 of 6            906-IA-1-2020-BA-3336-2019.doc




 co-accused had rejected the applications preferred by the applicants

 by distinguishing their case.


 5.        Learned counsel for the intervenor reiterated the submissions

 advanced by the learned APP. It is submitted that the incident had

 occurred on account of property dispute. Co-accused Haridas has

 been granted bail on different ground. The applicants are not

 entitled for bail on parity. There is evidence of witnesses referring to

 conversation between the accused regarding of assault on victim.

 Learned counsel for the intervenor on instructions from the

 complainant submitted that one more case was registered in past

 against the applicant Dattatraya Krushna Hande vide C.R. No. 62 of

 2001. The offence is of serious in nature. Hence, bail may not be

 granted to the applicant.


 6.        The FIR refers to the fact that there was quarrel between both

 the parties. The complainant and his father were abused. The

 applicants and co-accused Haridas were present on the road and they

 were having some conversation. Hanumant Kolekar was also present

 along with them. He went towards his house and brought axe. The

 applicants had allegedly instigated other accused not to spare the

 victim and his father. Role assigned to the applicants is that they

 were present at the scene of offence and instigating the co-accused.




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2020                      ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2020 00:26:41 :::
  Sajakali Jamadar                              5 of 6            906-IA-1-2020-BA-3336-2019.doc




 It is pertinent to note that co-accused Hanumant suddenly went

 towards house and brought axe and assaulted the deceased. The

 statement of Bankat Gaikwad was recorded on 13 th November, 2019.

 He has referred the conversation between the applicants and co-

 accused Haridas Hande. He was accompanied by Chandrakant

 Hawaldar. They heard the conversation between accused wherein

 one of them was saying, action will have to be initiated against the

 victim Appa Hande. The version of the said witnesses is vague.

 There is delay in recording the statements. The statement of

 Chandrakant Hawalder was recorded on 5th November, 2019. While

 granting bail to co-accused Haridas, the learned Sessions Judge had

 considered that he was suffering from ailment and he was senior

 citizen. However, in Paragraph 12 it is mentioned that having regard

 to prima facie circumstances and by judging the role allegedly played

 by Haridas, bail can be granted by exercising discretion in his favour.

 Considering the aforesaid circumstances case for grant of bail is

 made out.


 7.        Hence, I pass the following order :


                                         ORDER

i) Bail Application No. 3336 of 2019 & 3356 of 2019 are allowed;

::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2020 00:26:41 ::: Sajakali Jamadar 6 of 6 906-IA-1-2020-BA-3336-2019.doc

ii) The applicants are directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R. No. 557 of 2019 registered with Tembhurni Police Station, Dist. Solapur Rural on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount;

iii) The applicants shall report concerned police station once in a month on every first Saturday between 10.00 am. to 12.00 noon till conclusion of trial.

iv) Bail Applications as well as Intervention applications stand disposed of accordingly.

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) ::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 16/01/2020 00:26:41 :::