The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to grant bail should be exercised judiciously, following well-established principles, and not in a mechanical or cryptic manner.

JUDGMENT

1. This is an application for cancellation of bail granted to the non-applicant No.2 vide order below Exh.53, dtd. 25/1/2022 in Sessions Trial Case No.11 of 2021 in connection with Crime No.80 of 2020 registered with the Police Station Akot City, District : Akola for the offences punishable under Ss. 302, 120, 120-B, 201 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Ss. 3/25, 5/27, 7/27 of the Arms Act and Ss. 47/177, 130(1)(2)/177, 3/181 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

2. The brief fact of the present case are as follows: On 22/2/2020, a report was lodged by the police constable Bhashkar Shaligram Sangale, stating therein that on 21/2/2020 at about 22 hours while he was watching T.V. at his home, he heard a sound like fire cracker. Thus, when he came out at his house, he witnessed a person lying on the ground in in front of the quarter of police constable Dubey and further saw that one person of thin built fleeing from the spot while one other well built person riding a motor cycle nearby. When the informant raised alarm, two persons fled from the spot on the motor cycle. Accordingly, he intimated to the police and thereupon, the police personnel approached the lying person and thereupon, it revealed that he was Tushar Phundkar, who was the Ex-Chief of District Prahaar Sanghatana. The deceased breathed his last during the treatment in hospital. Thereafter, the offence was registered under Ss. 302, 120, 120-B, 201 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Ss. 3/25, 5/27, 7/27 of the Arms Act and Ss. 47/177, 130(1)(2)/177, 3/181 of the Motor Vehicles Act vide Crime No.80 of 2020.

3. During the course of investigation, it was transpired that the accused Pawan Sedani on the count of avenging his brother Teja Sedani's murder, hatched a conspiracy and accordingly procured arms with the help of accused Nikhil Sedani and said plot was executed by the accused Shyam Swapnil Nathe, the non-applicant No.2 herein and one Alpesh Dudhe.

4. According to the prosecution, the non-applicant No.2 has shot deceased Tushar in the head and committed brutal cold blooded murder.

5. The non-applicant No.2 was arrested on 26/3/2020. Thereafter, he preferred an application for grant of regular bail, which was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Akot vide order below Exh.53 dtd. 25/1/2022 which is sought to be cancelled.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

7. Shri Ghurde, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the bail was granted by the learned Sessions Judge on irrelevant material. It is submitted that order granting bail is perverse.

8. It is submitted that it was a cold blooded murder and looking to the evidence collected by the prosecution, the learned trial Court ought not to have granted bail to the non- applicant No.2. He further submits that the order on it's face shows that in a cryptic and mechanical manner it was passed without taking into consideration relevant material.

9. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that while considering the prayer for grant of bail, the guiding factors would be gravity of the crime, character of the evidence and position and status of the accused with reference to the victim and witnesses, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and repeating the offence, the possibility of his tampering with the witnesses and obstructing the course of justice. He submits that these factors have not been considered by the learned Sessions Court while granting bail to the non-applicant No.2 and therefore, as to the order passed by the learned trial Court is against the well recognized principles underlying the power to grant bail. He has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kanwar Singh Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan and another,(2012) 12 SCC 180. He therefore, prays for cancellation of bail.

10. On the other hand, Shri Thakare, learned APP submits that the offence was committed with premeditation. It is submitted that the evidence