SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
SUSHANT BALNATH PUNWATKAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAH. THR. PSO MAREGAON YAVATMAL – Respondent
BA 710/2020



41 LDVC 416.2020

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

LD-VC-CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 416 OF 2020

(Sushant Balnath Punwatkar, Yavatmal Vs. State of Maharashtra)

__________________________________________________________________________

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

appearances, Court'

s orders of directions

Court'

s or Judge'

s orders.

and Registrar'

s Orders.

Shri M.N. Ali, Advocate for the applicant.

Mrs. S.S. Jachak, A.P.P. for the non-applicant.

CORAM : PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.

AUGUST 06, 2020.

Heard Shri Ali, learned counsel for the

applicant and Mrs. Jachak, learned A.P.P. for the

non-applicant through Video Conferencing.

2.

The applicant is said to be arrested on

03/11/2019 in connection with Crime No.285/2019

dated 03/11/2019 registered at Police Station,

Maregaon, District Yavatmal for the offences

punishable under Sections 201 and 302 read with

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Perused the application, affidavit-in-reply

and the documents annexed.

4.

At the outset, the whole case is based on

circumstantial evidence. The probable cause of death,

as per the postmortem report, is ‘exphyxia’ due to

strangulation. The present applicant is arrayed as an

accused only on the basis of recovery of ‘dupatta’

,

which is allegedly used for strangulation.

41 LDVC 416.2020

2

5.

The applicant is in jail since November,

2019. The investigation is completed and chargesheet

is also filed. The prosecution could not point out,

from the affidavit-in-reply, any other substantive

material to connect the present applicant clearly with

the alleged crime. The prosecution also could not

point out any criminal antecedent against the present

applicant.

6.

In the given facts, this Court is of the

opinion that a fit case for grant of bail is made out.

Accordingly, I pass the following order :-

ORDER

i)

The Criminal Application is allowed.

ii)

The applicant be released on bail in

connection with Crime No.285/2019 dated

03/11/2019 registered at Police Station, Maregaon,

District Yavatmal for the offences punishable under

Sections 201 and 302 read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code on his furnishing PR bond in the

sum of Rs.30,000/- with one solvent surety in the

like amount.

iii)

The applicant shall not in any manner

tamper with the evidences.

7.

Needless to say that the trial Court should

not get influenced by the observations made above

and shall decide the case on its own merits.

41 LDVC 416.2020

3

8.

The Criminal Application is disposed of

accordingly.

9.

This order be communicated to the

counsel appearing for the parties, either on the email

address or on Whats app or by such other mode, as is

permissible in law.

JUDGE

Sumit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top