IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1276 OF 2020

Radhakisan @ Balu Waman Patole

… Versus …

The State of Maharashtra

...

Mr. S.S. Ladda, Advocate for applicant

Mr. N.T. Bhagat, APP for respondent/State

...

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.

DATE :

04^th DECEMBER, 2020.

ORDER :

1

Present application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Applicant has been arrested in connection with

Crime No.437/2020 by Police Station, M.I.D.C., Waluj, Dist. Aurangabad for

the offence punishable under Section 394 read with Section 34 of the Indian

Penal Code.

2

Heard learned Advocate Mr. S.S. Ladda for applicant and learned

AGP Mr. N.T. Bhagat for respondent.

3

It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that

the applicant is innocent. The alleged incident is stated to have taken place

2

BA_1276_2020

on 06.09.2020, however, the First Information Report has been registered in

the midnight of 10.09.2020. There is delay of four days, which is not

explained by the informant. In fact, brother of the present applicant Balu

Waman Patole was murdered by the friends of informant on 10.07.2020 vide

Crime No.344/2020. Offence was registered under Section 302, 143, 147,

148, 149, 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Just in order to pressurize the

applicant a false and concocted FIR is lodged. The co-accused are already

released. The present applicant had also approached the Sessions Court,

however, his application has been rejected, on the ground of his criminal

antecedents. Only two cases are pending against him inclusive of the present

case. In other cases he is acquitted. Further, in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of

Uttar Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No.152 of 2020 decided on 24^th January,

2020, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that criminal antecedents cannot be

the ground for refusal of bail. Now, the case, under which he is arrested, is

trible by Court of Sessions. Almost entire investigation is over, and therefore,

his further physical custody is not required. Learned Advocate, therefore,

prayed for release of the applicant on bail.

4

Per contra, the learned APP strongly opposed the application. It

is submitted that the present applicant is a hardened criminal. More than 10

cases are registered against him. Most of them are the offences against body.

3

BA_1276_2020

He is also involved in offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant was abducted and then by assaulting him, his ATM card was

forcibly taken and by using the said card and asking him to part with the PIN,

amount of Rs.11,500/- has been withdrawn, so also, the cash of Rs.7,000/-

has been stolen. There is evidence against the present applicant. One of the

accused is still absconding, and therefore, the applicant does not deserve any

sympathy.

5

At the outset, it is to be noted that applicant has given his age as

28 and he has also produced on record certain Judgments, in which he has

been acquitted. The first case, in which he appears to have been involved,

was registered in 2008 and the Judgment states that his age was 18, at that

time. It was under Section 341, 323, 504, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code.

Thereafter, the say given by the Investigating Officer would show that in 10

offences he is an accused.

Sr.No. Crime No.

Offence under Section

01

138/2006

341, 323, 504, 506 of IPC

02

54/2007

341, 323, 504, 506 of IPC

03

166/2007

452, 325, 323, 427, 504, 506 r.w.s. 34 of IPC

04

79/2008

459, 380 of IPC

05

209/2008

302, 201 r.w.s. 34 of IPC

06

136/2012

353, 143, 147, 148, 149, 332, 333, 504 of IPC and Section

135 of Bombay Police Act.

07

26/2012

142 of Bombay Police Act

4

BA_1276_2020

08

352/2013

498(A), 323, 504, 506 r.w.s. 34 of IPC

09

53/2016

307, 341, 504 r.w.s. 34 of IPC

10

277/2018

392, 323, 504, 506 r.w.s. 34 of IPC

The applicant has produced certified copies of certain

pronouncements, in which he has been acquitted. They are six in numbers