SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Bom) 685

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)
A. P. BHANGALE, J.
Madhav Manikrao Dhande
Vs.
State
Criminal Application (BA) No.152 of 2012 with Criminal Application (SA) Nos. 40, 42, 99, 112, 126, 212 of 2012
Decided on: 28th March, 2012

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. V.M. DESHPANDE, Adv., Mr. R.M. DAGA. Adv. (appointed), Mr. A.S. MARDIKAR, Adv., Mr. R.L. KHAPRE, Adv., Mr. R.N. GHUGE, Adv., Mr. P.S. PATIL, Adv., for the Respective Applicants.
Mr. N.W. SAMBRE, P.P. for Respondent/State.

Headnote:(A) Criminal P.C. (1973), S.176(lA)---Inquiry by Magistrate—When two parallel versions may appear from the investigation papers: one which may be in favour of the applicant/accused and the another version which may go against them, it is but essential that the report of Judicial Magistrate concerned pursuant to judicial inquiry can prove handy and useful for the trial Court to reach a correct conclusion when the trial is concluded. (Para 13)

       (B) Criminal P.C. (1973), S.437 - Bail - Benefit of bail cannot be denied merely on ground that accusations are serious Further probability of attempt to tamper with evidence by applicants can also be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions against applicants. (Para 14)

JUDGMENT

Heard.

2. By these applications, the applicants are seeking grant of bail in connection with Crime No.108 of 2011 reported at Police Station, Risod, District Washim, under Sections 201, 302, 330, 331, 341, 342, r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Atrocities Act').

3. The First Informant Mr. Madhav Manikrao Dhande, Police Inspector informed Risod Police about the incident. According to him, he was patrolling along with Police Constable Badge No.382, A,P.C. Mr. Rathod, etc. by official jeep. While they were patrolling, they received a source infom1ation that 5 to 6 pardhi persons are preparing to commit the offence of dacoity. Therefore, the first informant along with the police staff were put on alert in the forest area near Wathoda border. At about 3.35 a.m. policemen came across 5 to 6 persons, who were stopped by police. At that time, two persons, who were armed with sword and knife, attacked the police staff and started pelting stones. Police tried to arrest the offenders who were resisting their arrest, but the police, after using proper force against the offenders, overpowered and took them in custody after an altercation with them. Rest of the offenders who were pelting stones, took disadvantage of darkness and absconded. Two offenders, who were armed with sword and knife, were taken in custody. At that time, since those two offenders used weapons in their possession, H.C. B.No.335 Prakash Taram and HL B.No.343 Ashok Vaidya etc. were injured. One of the offenders who had run away, had also left one iron rod which was recovered under panchanama. The incident lasted for 30 to 45 minutes as two arrested accused Begya Pawar and another accused Raju Sheshrao Pawar were arrested. Against those two persons, a complaint was lodged on 10.5.2011 itself at about 6.20 a.m. In respect of this complaint, astonishingly final report is not yet tiled pursuant to investigation made in the complaint.

4. According to the applicants, on 14.6.2011, another complaint was lodged bearing F.I.R.No.108 of 2011, under Sections 302, 330, 331, 341, 342, 201 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, read further with Section 3(2) of the Atrocities Act by Anwar Mehboob Sheikh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, State CID at Police Station, Risod informing the police that, on or about 10.5.2011, police had taken custody of Begya Pawar, aged about 20 years, r/o. Wadhona, Tq. Sengaon, District Hingoli, who died later while in custody. His dead body was referred for post mortem to Vasantrao Naik Memorial Government Medical College, Yavatrnal.

5. Mr. Anwar Mehboob Sheikh, Dy. Superintendent of Police, State C.I.D. had informed that he had taken note of Standing Order from the Director General of Police, State of Maharashtra and took investigation into his hands. He visited the spot where dead body of Begya Nainu Pawar was lying and also visited hospital where injured Raju Sheshrao Pawar was taking medical treatment. He also met Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Washim in hospital who informed about the inquest panchanama drawn over dead body and also the fact that the dead body was referred for post mortem examination. Mr. Sheikh recorded statement of Raju Sheshrao Pawar and visited Police Station, Risod and took into his possession the papers in respect of A.D. No. 27 of 2011 reported u/s.174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He also took into possession copies of papers of F.I.R. No.88 of 2011 reported at Police Station, Risod and acquainted himself with report made by Police Inspector Dhande regarding the incident dt.10.5.2011 at 3.30 a.m. According to Mr. Anwar Sheikh Mehboob, he came to know subsequently after receiving inquest panchanama and post mortem report in respect of dead body of Begya Nanu Pawar - that Begya was arrested from his house and Raju Pawar another accused, was arrested from his agricultural field and they were broug






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top