IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

(CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2022

DIST :KOLHAPUR

In the matter of Application for bail

U/sec. 439 of Criminal Procedure
Code.
AND
In the matter of C.R. No. 699 of 2021
registered with Vadgaon Police
Station, District-Kolhapur for the
offences punishable u/s. 363, 323,
364A, 365, 368, 143, 144, 147, 148
r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code.
Kiran Madhukar Patil
Age.43, Occu. Contractor,
R/o. House No. 121, Tanaji Chowk,
Urun Islampur, Tal-Walva, District-Kolhapur
(Applicant at present is in Judicial Custody)
…APPLICANT
(Orig. Accused No. 1)
V/s.

The State of Maharashtra

(C.R. No. 699 of 2021 registered
With Vadgaon Police Station, Kolhapur) …RESPONDENT

TO,
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND
OTHER HON’BLE PUISNE JUDGE OF
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
BOMBAY.
HUMBLE APPLICATION OF
THE
APPLICANT ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

1. The Applicant, who is the Original Accused No. 1 in C.R. No.

699 of 2021 registered with Vadgaon Police Station, District-
Kolhapur for the offences punishable u/s. 363, 323, 364A, 365, 368,
143, 144, 147, 148 r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code is filing present
application u/s 439 of Cr. P.C. seeking Applicant’s release on regular
bail. Few facts leading to rising of present application can be stated in
short as follows.
2. The Applicant states and submits that, one Kuldeep Vidhyadhar
Patil has lodged a complaint in the Vadgaon Police Station alleging
that he was travelling along with his uncle, Vishwajeet Shivajirao
Mane, in his Indica car from Mumbai to his village Bhalawani Dist.
Sangli. Along the way at Bavachi, Tal.Walva, they picked up Utkarsh
Mane and proceeded towards Vathar Bridge. There they waited for
one Pintu Parit. It is further alleged that while Vishwajeet Mane was
waiting in the car a group of 7-8 persons suddenly came and started
assaulting him and asked him to return their money. When
Vishwajeet’s son, Utkarsh Mane asked them as to why they were
beating his father, the 7-8 unknown persons started beating him too.
They made both of them sit forcibly in the Indica Car and kidnapped
and took them towards the direction of Islampur. Thereafter the
complainant, Kuldeep Patil, informed his father and aunt about the
alleged incident.

3. The Applicant states and submits that, it is further alleged in the

FIR that, after the complainant informed his father and aunt about the
alleged incident, his aunt Rekha Vishwajeet Mane, called the mobile
number of Vishwajeet Mane. Vishwajeet Mane on phone informed
that he and his son were safe and sound in Gokul Shirgaon Area and
that he would come to Vadgaon Police Station and asked them not to
worry. Further it is contended in the FIR that as the mobile number of
Vishwajeet Mane was later switched off, the complainant on
18.12.2021 lodged complaint against those 7-8 unknown persons and
it was registered u/s 363, 323 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code.

4. The Applicant states and submits that, on careful perusal of the

FIR, it can be seen that there has been a delay in lodging of the FIR. It
is further contended that the complaint is against 7-8 unknown
persons and the present Applicant’s name has not been mentioned
anywhere in the complaint.
5. The Applicant states and submits that there is no nexus of

the rift between one Mr. LadyaMirajkar, Mr. SohailMirjakar and

the dead of the deceased. The statement in the FIR states that

directly seeing the deceased all the accused started hitting him,

this statement is not justifiable and no prudent man will believe

to the said statement.

6. The Applicant states and submits that it is hard to believe

that no one except the deceased got hurt in the said event and

no one from the crowd reached to settle the matter between all

accused and the deceased and the complainant was also

standing and watching his brother being killed.

7. The Applicant states and submits that when Autopsy

examination was conducted on the deceased, there is only

mentions about the two wounds/injury that one which was

caused by the juvenilei.e Accused No.1 who had assaulted by

placing the knife near the throat and one near the chest and

lungs caused by the blow of knife by the Accused No.2, there is

no specific mention of the wound/injury in the autopsy report

like there are CLW or abrasion injuries or fracture or dislocation

of bone to the deceased. This injuries usually occurs by hitting

with fist and legs to the person which is not mention in the

autopsy report, which clearly denies the statement of the

witnesses that the deceased was bitten by the Applicant after

the blow of knife by Accused No.2

8. The Applicant state and submits that the

Applicant/Accused was arrested on 18.10.2019. The present

applicant after completing necessary P.C.R. is remanded to

judicial custody on 24.10.2019. The investigation in the matter is

completed and the matter has been committed before Ld. Addl.

District Judge, Jaysingpurbearing Sessions Case No. 4 of

2020.Hereto Annexed and marked EXHIBIT “B” is the copy of

the charge sheet

9. The Applicant states and submits that the applicant had

applied for regular bail before Ld. Additional Judge in Cri Bail No.

218/2020 which was rejected on 31.01.2020. Hereto Annexed

and marked EXHIBIT “C” is the copy of order dated 31.01.2020

passed by the Ld. Additional Session Judge, Jaysingpur

10. The Applicant states and submits that, in the facts and

circumstancesmentioned above the Applicant filling present

Regular Bail u/s. 439 of Cr. P.C. seeking Regular Bail Application

in connection with C.R. No. 215 of 2019 registered with Shahapur

Police Station, District-Sangli for the offences punishable u/s.

302,323 r/w sec 34 of I.P.C. on following amongst other grounds

which are taken without prejudice to each other:

GROUNDS

(A) That the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely

implicated in this offence on the basis of the unreliable

and inadmissible evidence;

(B) That the present applicant/accused is not habitual

criminal;
(C) That the investigation in the alleged offence is over and

final charge sheet is also been filed before the Hon'ble

Additional Session Judge;

(D) That on perusal of the FIR and the statement of the

witnesses it can be seen there is no act of the Applicant

in the said incident, the Applicant was not involve in

hurting or assaulting or causing hurt to the deceased

which caused death of the deceased;

(E) That the autopsy report clearly mention about only two

injury which is caused by the weapon which is

recovered from the Accused No.2 and as it is alleged

that the weapon was used by the juvenile to assault the

deceased by placing it near the deceased throat the

wound so mention are near the throat and at the area of

the chest and lungs as it is alleged that the Accused

No.2 had blow the knife on the lungs;

(F) That the autopsy report doesn't mention about the

wound/injury like CLW or abrasion injuries or fracture or

dislocation of bone which could have been caused by

hitting with legs and fists;

(G) That on perusal of the FIR it can be seen that there was

a rift between the one Mr. LadyaMirajkar, Mr. Sohail

Mirajkar and the Applicant for bursting of crackers near

his house;

(H) That on perusal of the FIR and the statement of the

witnesses it is seen that seeing the deceased all the

accused started hitting him and Accused No.2 blow off

 the knife on the left lungs of the deceased, such

statement cannot be believed by any prudent man;

(I) That on perusal of the statement of the SohailMirajkar it

cannot be believed thatas the rift had taken place

between Ladya Mirajkar and him with all the accused he

left for his house after the quarrel;

(J) That the FIR is an afterthought story and constructive

and the name of the present applicant is added without

any direct act of the applicant;

(K) That, the alleged motive appears to be more or less

imaginary than real ;

(L) That , there is no nexus of the rift between the

LadyaMirajkar and SohailMirajkar with the death of the

deceased and there was no motive to cause the third

person who was not involve in the bursting crackers or

fight with the Applicant;

(M) That it is hard to believe that the deceased is killed on

just a quarrel on bursting of firecracker and refusing to

give the stereo system box at previous occasion;

(N) That the applicant had absolutely no motive to murder

the deceased. There is absence of motive and no act

was done by the Applicant that lead to the death of the

deceased; the applicant is falsely implicated;

(O) That, on perusal of the statement of the witnesses it

can be seen there were 7 to 8 family and friends

present at the time of the incident and there was even

 crowd which was gather at the spot and no one among

them could stop a juvenile to assault the deceased;

(P) That, on perusal of the statement of the witnesses it can

be seen the whole crowd even the complainant being

the brother of the deceased tried to snatch the knife

from the accused or tried saving the accused and no

one else was hurt except the deceased;

(Q) That, on perusal of the documents on record, it can be

seen that not the alleged eye witness, nor single eye

witness has tried to prevent the accused from doing the

alleged assault and are been injured;

(R) That the weapon used in the said event was recovered

from the another accused that the Accused No.2;

(S) That the said weapon so recovered by the police was

not used, or brought by the Applicant;

(T) That, there is no FIR filed by Mr. LadyaMirajkar and

SohailMirajkar that he was been abused and beaten by

the Applicant;

(U) That, the applicant will not hamper or tamper with the

prosecution evidence nor give threats to the

prosecution witness and nor he will abscond if released

on bail;

(V) That the applicant is permanent resident of above

mentioned address;

(W) That, the applicant is ready and willing to furnish

sufficient surety;
11. The Applicant craves leave to add to, alter, amend, delete

and/or modify any of the foregoing paras and grounds as and

when found necessary.

12. The Applicant has not filed any other Appeal, Application,

Revision or petition either in this Hon’ble Court or in the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India touching the subject matter of this

criminal application ever before except mentioned in this

Criminal Application.

13. THE APPLICANT THEREFORE PRAYS THAT:

a) That this Hon’ble High Court by exercising power u/s.

439 of Cr. P.C. be pleased to release the Applicant on

regular Bail in connection with C.R. No. 215 of 2019

registered with Shahapur Police Station, District-

Kolhapur for the offences punishable u/s. 302,323 r/w

sec 34of I.P.C. on such terms and conditions this

Hon’ble High Court may deems fit and proper.

b) That the Applicant is in magistrate custody and

affidavit in support of Bail Application may be

dispensed with;

c) For such other and further orders as this Hon’ble

Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the present case;

 AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS AND JUSTICE
THESE APPLICANTS AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER
PRAY.

Place : Mumbai

Date :23.03.2021 (UMESH R. MANKAPURE)

Advocate for the Applicant
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
(CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2021
DIST :KOLHAPUR
Sachin Arvind Nerlekar .. Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra
(C.R. No. 215 of 2019) .. Respondent
INDEX

S. Exh. Particulars of documents Pages

No.

1. ----- Synopsis

2. ----- Memo of the Application

3. “A” Copy of the FIR bearing C.R. No. 215

0f 2019 registered with Shahapur

Police Station, District-Kolhapur for

the offences punishable u/s. 302,

323 r/w sec 34 of I.P.C.

4. “B” Copy of the charge sheet.

5. "C" Copy of order dated 31.01.2020

passed by the Ld. Additional Session

Judge, Jaysingpur.

LAST PAGE NO.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
(CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2021
DIST :KOLHAPUR
Sachin Arvind Nerlekar .. Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra
(C.R. No. 215 of 2019) .. Respondent

Challenging the Briefs :

I. S Y N O P S I S
1. The Applicant, who isthe Original Accused in C.R. No. 215
of 2019 registered with Shahapur Police Station, District-
Kolhapur for the offences punishable u/s. 302,323 r/w sec 34 of
I.P.C is filing present application u/s 439 of Cr. P.C. seeking to
release him on regular bail.
II. LIST OF DATES.
Date Particulars of events
17.10.2019 On 17.10.2019, at around 8:40 pm, it being
Sankasti there was Aarti of the Lord Ganesha
which was near to the Accused resident.
18.10.2019 The brother of the deceased Mr. Amol Shivudkar
filed the FIR against the accused registered at
Shahapur Police Station and Applicant/Accused
was arrested.
31.01.2020 The applicant had applied for regular bail before
Ld. Additional Judge in Cri Bail No. 218/2020 which
was rejected on 31.01.2020.
Hence this Application

II. POINTS TO BE URGED:-

(A) That the applicant had absolutely no motive to murder
the deceased. There is absence of motive and no act
was done by the Applicant that lead to the death of the
deceased; the applicant is falsely implicated;
(B) That, on perusal of the documents on record, it can be
seen that not the alleged eye witness, nor single eye
witness has tried to prevent the accused from doing the
alleged assault and are been injured;

ACTS TO BE REFERRED :-
(1) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE
(2) INDIAN PENAL CODE.

AUTHORITIES TO BE CITED :
Nil at present.
Place: Mumbai
Date: 23/03/2021
(UMESH R. MANKAPURE)
Advocate for the
Applicant