Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
RAJAL MAHADU GURUD AND ORS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA – Respondent
BA 954/2021
1/13 00 BA-954.21 J.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.954 OF 2021
1.
Rajal Mahadu Gurud,
residing at : Taluka Dahanu, District
Palghar.
]
]
]
2.
Raju Gopaji Gurud
residing at : Divashi, Chinchpada,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
3.
Mahesh Janu Gurud
residing at : Divashi, Chinchpada,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
4.
Vijay Savji Pilena
residing at : Dhulsetpada, Dabhadi,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
5.
Risha Savaji Pilena
residing at : Dhulsetpada, Dabhadi,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
6.
Lahanya Kakad Valakar
residing at : Divashi, Chinchpada,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
7.
Deepak Rupji Gurud,
residing at : Divashi, Chinchpada,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
AJN
JAYARAJAN
ANJAKULATH
NAIR
Digitally signed by
JAYARAJAN
ANJAKULATH NAIR
Date: 2022.04.01
16:24:18 +0530
2/13 00 BA-954.21 J.odt
8.
Sitaram Bhikhlya-Rathad,
residing at : Divashi, Chinchpada,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
9.
Vijay Raghu Gurud,
residing at : Divashi, Chinchpada,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
10. Ratna Kalu Bhaway,
residing at Divashi, Gadadpada,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
]
]
]
11. Sandesh Janu Gurud
residing at : Divashi, Chinchpada,
Taluka Dahanu, District Palghar.
(Presently detained in Central
Prison, Taloja, Navi Mumbai.)
]
]
]
]
]
… Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Kasa Police Station.)
]
] … Respondent
…
Ms. Vrishali R. Raje for the applicants.
Mr. Satish Maneshinde, Special Public Prosecutor with Ms. S.S.
Kaushik, A.P.P. for the State.
…
CORAM
: MRS. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
RESERVED ON
: 09TH MARCH, 2022.
PRONOUNCED ON : 01ST APRIL, 2022.
AJN
3/13 00 BA-954.21 J.odt
ORDER.:-
1.
The applicants before me came to be arraigned as accused in
C.R. No.I-76 of 2020 and C.R. No.77 of 2020 registered with
Kasa Police Station under Sections 302, 307, 120(B), 353, 332,
341, 342, 427, 109, 117, 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 152, 188,
201, 269, 270, 290, 505 (2) read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code read with Sections 51(b), 52, 54 of the Disaster
Management Act, 2005 and Sections 2, 3, 4, 5 of the Epidemic
Act, 1897 and Sections 135, 37(1)(3) of the Destruction of Public
Property Act, 1984 and came to be arrested on 30/04/2020 and,
since then, they are incarcerated.
On completion of investigation, charge-sheet is filed and
they are charge-sheeted.
2.
The applicants seek their release on bail on the ground that
the prosecution has not been able to compile cogent and reliable
evidence against them in the charge-sheet and as the case of the
prosecution is to the effect that a mob of 400 to 500 villagers was
present at the spot, on the date of the incident and the gathering
violated the norms of lockdown and curfew hours and the mob
lynched three persons and even attacked the police. It is submitted
that he identification of the present applicants in the episode is
doubtful.
The learned counsel Ms. Vrishali Raje submits that the
AJN
4/13 00 BA-954.21 J.odt
charge-sheet is voluminous, running into 12000 pages and the
investigation into the offence conducted by the local CID, is in no
way, sufficient to implicate the applicants for the offences with
which they are charged. It is argued that without any sufficient
evidence, about their active participation in the assault, which led
to the death of the three persons, the applicants cannot be held
guilty of any conspiracy. The foremost submission of Ms. Raje is
to the effect that the prosecution has collected evidence in the form
o
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
