Back
2021 Supreme(Bom) 1584
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
V.G. Bisht, J.
Prabhakar Devba Gharge & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Bail Application No. 3127, 3610 of 2021, Interim Application No. 2445 of 2021
Decided On : 10-12-2021
Shirish Gupte, Advocate, Manoj Mohite, Advocate, Vaibhav Gaikwad, Advocate, Dilip Bodake, Advocate, Ashok Mundargi, Advocate, Dilip Bodake, Advocate, P. P. Shinde, Advocate, Sanjeev Kadam, Advocate, Vaibhav Jagdale, Advocate, Malojirao Deshmukh, Advocate
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of key provisions of the Indian Penal Code in the context of assault and culpable homicide.
Headnote:
Section 439 - Indian Penal Code - 302, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 201 - The court discussed the offenses punishable under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including assault, causing hurt, and culpable homicide. The key legal provisions of these sections were interpreted in the context of the assault and resulting death, influencing the court's decision to reject the applications.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, an employee at a sugar factory, was assaulted and sustained serious injuries, leading to his death. The prosecution alleged that the applicants and other accused were involved in the assault.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was sufficient evidence to indicate the involvement of the applicants in the offense, and therefore rejected the applications.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the involvement of the applicants in the assault leading to the death of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the statements of witnesses, postmortem report, and inconsistencies in the statements to determine the involvement of the applicants in the offense.
Final Decision: The court rejected the applications.
JUDGMENT
V. G. Bisht, J. - The present applications have been moved by the applicants under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Crime No.80 of 2021 registered with Police Station Vaduj, Satara, for offences punishable under Section 302, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2 Interim Application No.2445 of 2021 filed by the intervenor is allowed to the extent of assisting the learned APP and stands disposed off.
3 The prosecution case in nutshell is that deceased Jagdeep Thorat was working with Khatav Man Taluka Agro Processing Ltd. Padal Sugar Factory ("factory" for short) as a General Manager (Processing). An enquiry was conducted in respect of theft of sugar from the factory and the deceased was one of the suspect along with others. The prosecution alleges that on 10th March 2021, in between 5.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m., first in the applicant no.1s cabin and thereafter in Manoj Ghorpades cabin, the applicants and other accused assaulted deceased Jagdeep Thorat with fist and kick blows, fibre sticks and sugarcane sticks, as a result of which, he sustained serious injuries. At about 8.30 p.m., deceaseds wife and brother-in-law Vikram Patil are stated to have taken the deceased home and on the next day he was taken to hospital and on admission, was declared dead.
4 It then appears that on 11th March 2021, U.B.Mane, Police Head Constable, who was on duty at Karad Police Station received letter from Dr.Ravindra More of Karad Hospital at Karad informing that deceased was brought in hospital in an injured condition with a history of severe injuries due to assault which had taken place in the factory on 10th March 2021 between 5.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. In view of unnatural death, ADR was registered and enquiry was entrusted to Police Sub-Inspector of Karad Police Station. On the basis of observations in the enquiry, Officer of Karad City Police Station registered the offence vide C.R.No.176 of 2021. As the offence took place within the jursidiction of Vaduj Police station, the requisite papers along with letter were forwarded to Vaduj Police station.
5 The informant, on the basis of copies of Medico Legal Certificate and other documents and the information disclosed from Vikram Patil (brother-in-law of deceased) lodged the First Information Report (FIR) vide C.R.No.80 of 2021.
6 Mr.Shirish Gupte, learned senior counsel for the applicant in Bail Application No.3127 of 2021 submits that from the statement of witnesses it would be seen that there was no intention to cause death and therefore it cannot be termed as a homicidal death. The learned senior counsel also invited my attention to the statement of Vikram Aakaram Patil and would suggest that no specific role is attributed to the present applicant.
7 Similarly, Mr.Ashok Mundargi, learned senior counsel for the applicant in Bail Application No.3610 of 2021 has more or less supported the submissions advanced by Mr.Shirish Gupte, learned senior counsel for the applicant in Bail Application No.3127 of 2021 and also invited my attention to the statements of witnesses and pointed out how improvement is made subsequently during the course of recording of statement. The learned senior counsel also invited my attention to the postmortem report and pointed out the injuries. All injuries were in the nature of contusion and therefore it cannot be said that the death in question is homicidal.
8 Smt.P. P. Shinde, learned APP, on the other hand, with the assistance of Mr.Sanjeev Kadam, learned counsel for the intervenor, opposed the submissions by contending that not only the deceased was detained and confined in the chamber of applicants but was severely assaulted with the help of other accused. The learned APP also placed reliance on postmortem report and forcefully submitted that the cause of death was the injuries sustained by the deceased. Even according to the learned APP, the deceased had apprised the witnesses that he was severely beaten by the applicants and othe
