23-apeal-349-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 349 OF 2022

Shriram Kailas Suryawanshi

...Appellant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

...Respondents

Mr. Prashant M. Patil for the Appellant

Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1–State

Mr. Bhavesh Sawant i/b Ms. Minal Chaudhari for the Respondent

No.2

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

V. G. BISHT, JJ.

WEDNESDAY, 6

th JULY 2022

P.C. :

1

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2

By this appeal, the appellant seeks his enlargement on bail

in connection with C.R. No. 142 of 2021 registered with the

Ghodegaon Police Station, Pune, for the alleged offences punishable

SQ Pathan

1/7

SHAGUFTA

Q PATHAN

Digitally

signed by

SHAGUFTA

Q PATHAN

Date:

2022.07.08

16:07:32

+0530

23-apeal-349-2022.doc

under Sections 302, 143, 147, 148, 149, 326, 325, 324, 504, 506 of

the Indian Penal Code; under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of the

Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

and under Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

3

Learned counsel for the appellant seeks bail on the ground

of parity. He submits that the role of the appellant is identical to that

of co-accused–Akshay @ Sonya Anant Yewale, who has been enlarged

on bail by this Court (Coram : S. S. Shinde & Sarang V. Kotwal, JJ.)

vide order dated 11^th April 2022, passed in Criminal Appeal

No.1043/2021. Learned counsel has tendered a copy of the order

dated 11^th April 2022.

4

Learned A.P.P had sought time on the last date to verify

whether the role of the appellant was similar to that of co-accused –

Akshay @ Sonya Yewale. Today, learned A.P.P states that the role of

the appellant is similar to that of co-accused–Akshay @ Sonya Yewale.

SQ Pathan

2/7

23-apeal-349-2022.doc

5

Perused the papers. The FIR is based on the

statement/dying declaration given by the deceased-Kailash himself. It

is stated in the FIR that the incident took place on 27^th June 2021 at

about 6:00 p.m, when the complainant had gone to the construction

site of his friend-Vasant Ubhe’s house. It is stated in the FIR that after

sometime, Omkar Gholap, Suraj Gholap and Aniket Gholap alongwith

four persons came at around 8:00 p.m, that their faces were covered;

that Omkar Gholap abused and assaulted him with a sickle on his

head, knees, ear, thigh, etc.; Suraj Gholap and Aniket Gholap

assaulted him with iron rod on his left hand, back, left leg, etc. The

four other assailants who were alleged to have accompanied them and

whose faces were also covered, are also alleged to have assaulted him

with iron rods. The persons who were present at the spot, rescued the

complainant and informed Kailash’s brother – Yuvraj. Initially, Kailash

was taken to Rural Hospital, Ghodegaon, and then to Y.C.M Hospital,

where his statement was recorded and based on the said statement,

C.R. was registered.

SQ Pathan

3/7

23-apeal-349-2022.doc

6

It is not in dispute that investigation is over and charge-

sheet is filed in the said case. There are eye-witnesses to the said

incident i.e. Vasant Ubhe, Shrikant Gengje and Pavan Gengje. The

supplementary statements of these witnesses are also on record.

According to the eye-witness-Vasant Ubhe, Omkar Gholap had

assaulted Kailash with sickle on various parts of his body. Vasant

Ubhe, in his statement, has stated that six unknown persons had

accompanied Omkar Gholap and they too have assaulted Kailash with

iron rods all over his body. The statements of the eye-witnesses are

similar. In the supplementary statements, the said witnesses have

stated that they learnt of the appellant’s name, after his arrest by the

police. The cause of death of Kailash is stated to be `head injury with

polytrauma’.

7

Admittedly, the appellant has not been named by any of the

eye-witnesses, including the deceased himself. Neither any test

identification parade has b