Bombay High Court
Vishal Sanjay Ahire vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 December, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 BOM 3054
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Bharati Dangre
1/6 28 BA-89.20 (02-12).odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.89 OF 2020
Vishal Sanjay Ahire .. Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
...
Mr. Sachin H. Deokar for the Applicant.
Ms. M.M. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for the State.
...
CORAM: SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
DATED : 02ND DECEMBER, 2020.
P.C:-
1. C.R. No.716 of 2016 registered with Pimpri Police Station
was investigated and has resulted into charge-sheet being filed
for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 326, 324,
323, 504, 506, 143, 144, 146, 147, 148 and 149 of the IPC and
under Section 4(25) of the Arms Act and under Section 37(1)
read with Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act and under
Section 3 and 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The
Applicant is arraigned as Accused No.4 and he seeks his release
on bail.
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 13:36:14 :::
2/6 28 BA-89.20 (02-12).odt
2. The submission of Mr. Sachin Deokar, learned counsel for
the Applicant is to the effect that the Applicant is a young boy
aged 19 years, and he has no criminal antecedents. The
Applicant is arrested in relation to the said crime on 17/12/2016
and his Bail Application filed before the Sessions Judge, Pune, is
rejected. Learned counsel submits that on a plain reading of the
FIR and the material filed in the charge-sheet, which include the
statements of the injured persons, at the most, the Applicant
could be attributed to an offence for attempt to commit murder
and even the injured witnesses have ascribed him the role of
assaulting the Complainant. According to the witnesses, he did
not give any blow to the deceased and, therefore, there is no
possibility of his conviction under Section 302 of the IPC.
3. Learned A.P.P., on the other hand, vehemently submits that
the invocation of offence of murder is coupled with Section 149
of the IPC and, therefore, his presence at the spot when the
incident took place would be sufficient to rope him in the
offence of murder along with the other accused persons who
caused the death of Ashpak Shaikh, who succumbed to the
assault on 15/12/2016.
4. With the assistance of learned counsel for the respective
parties, perused the charge-sheet and the material compiled
therein indicting the Applicant in the said crime. The
Complainant is one Ravindra Gadhire, who is also an injured.
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 13:36:14 :::
3/6 28 BA-89.20 (02-12).odt
He has narrated the incident which took place on 13/12/2016
when he along with deceased Ashpak Shaikh were chitchatting
in one lane in their locality at Pimpri, Pune. He has alleged that
at around 9.30 p.m, a person acquainted to him by name Sandesh
Kamble accompanied by Akash, Chota Ravan, Vishal Ahire
(Applicant), Anil and 4 to 5 other persons approached them.
Sandesh Kamble is said to have entered into a brawl and, a
verbal altercation took place. At that time, the Complainant
allege that, Sandesh Kamble assaulted Ashpak on his head by
means of sickle with an intention to kill him and Akash fell him
on the ground and assaulted him by fist blows. The Complainant
further narrates that at that time, Chota Ravan assaulted him by
sickle on his back. At the same time, when the deceased was
assaulted by the other accused, the present Applicant Vishal
Ahire attacked him by means of iron rod and he gave a blow on
his back and accused Anil assaulted him by means of wooden
log. The Complainant thus alleges that all the accused persons
assaulted Ashpak and him by means of weapons in their hands.
It is also alleged that all the accused persons were clamoring,
resulting into an atmosphere of terror in the locality and the
persons residing nearby moved inside and shop keepers pulled
shutters down. The injured were taken to the hospital and
Ashpak succumbed to the injuries.
5. It is this version of the Complainant which is corroborated
by the statements of witnesses like Sangita Waghmare, Ashwini
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 13:36:14 :::
4/6 28 BA-89.20 (02-12).odt
Gadhire, Hayat Mehtab Shaikh and Yasmin Ayub Shaikh, who
gathered the names of the assailants from Ashpak. In her
statement, Ashwini Gadhire states that she reached the spot on
being informed that her husband Ravindra Gadhire
(Complainant) was being assaulted. She state that Sandesh
Kamble, Akash Karale and 7 to 8 persons accompanying him
were armed with sword, sickle and rods and they were assaulting
her husband and Ashpak. She state that Sandesh Kamble had
assaulted Ashpak in his head along with Chota Ravan. Vishal
Ahire assaulted the Complainant on his back by means of iron
rod. She thus alleges that Sandesh Kamble and his accomplice
assaulted her husband by means of the weapons they were
carrying and they created a reign of terror in the locality. The
injured were referred to the hospital and Ashpak succumbed to
the injuries. On postmortem of the dead body of Ashpak, the
cause of death is opine as "due to head injury".
6. The supplementary statements have also been recorded of
the residents of the locality since it is alleged that they did not
give the true depiction of the incident on account of the
atmosphere of terror created by the accused persons. The said
statements attribute the Applicant the role of assaulting Ravindra
by means of iron rod in his back and it is not the case of the
prosecution that the Applicant assaulted Ashpak Shaikh resulting
into the invocation of Section 302 of the IPC against him.
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 13:36:14 :::
5/6 28 BA-89.20 (02-12).odt
7. The four unknown persons named in the FIR have been
released on bail by the Sessions Court. The Additional Sessions
Judge has merely rejected the Application of the Applicant on
the ground that he would tamper the prosecution evidence.
8. The Applicant was arrested on 17/12/2016 and since then,
he is incarcerated. It is informed that the charges are yet not
been framed and it is uncertain when the trial will commence
and conclude. By ensuring that the Applicant is available for
trial and he does not create any pressure on the witnesses, who
are residents of Pimpri, Pune but, at the same time on
ascertaining the role assigned to the Applicant in the charge-
sheet and also accepting the fact that at the end of the trial, with
the aid of Section 149 of the IPC, where every member of an
unlawful assembly can be held guilty of an offence committed in
prosecution of common object, the Applicant, in my considered
opinion, cannot be kept behind bar indefinitely and the following
order would suffice the ends of justice.
ORDER
(a) The Applicant - Vishal Sanjay Ahire, shall be released on bail in C.R. No.716 of 2016 registered with Pimpri Police Station, District Pune on executing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or two sureties of the like amount.
AJN
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 13:36:14 :::
6/6 28 BA-89.20 (02-12).odt
(b) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case and shall not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(c) The Applicant shall report to the Pimpri Police Station twice in every month between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.
(d) The Applicant shall provide his residential address and telephone number to the Investigating Officer.
(e) The Applicant shall cooperate with the trial and attend the trial Court on every dates unless exempted by the Court.
9. The Application is allowed in the aforestated terms.
10. All parties are directed to act on the downloaded copy of the order supplied by the Advocate under his seal and signature.
SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
AJN ::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 09/02/2021 13:36:14 :::