Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Ramdas Sakharam Pawar, the first informant and cousin of the deceased Santosh Pawar, filed an application for cancellation of bail granted to Respondent No.2, Raju Vishnu Patil, who was Accused No.2 in Crime No.50 of 2007 registered at Kulgaon police station under Sections 302, 307, 324, 147, 148, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 27(B) of the Arms Act. The incident occurred on 30-10-2007 when the deceased and others went to see a piece of land. At about 5.15 p.m., a Tata Sumo vehicle gave a dash to their car, and Accused No.1 Balaram Patil and others assaulted the deceased with knives, causing his death. The FIR specifically named Accused No.2 Raju Patil as one of the assailants. The statement of Dattatray Pawar also stated that Accused No.2 stabbed the deceased on the abdomen and neck with a Gupti. The postmortem report revealed 13 injuries, including 9 deep penetrating stab wounds. After investigation, a charge sheet was filed, and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. Accused No.2 filed a bail application (Exhibit-4) before the Sessions Court, claiming alibi that he was performing pooja at a shiv temple at the time of the incident. The Sessions Court granted bail to Accused No.2, which the applicant sought to cancel. The High Court, after hearing the parties, found that the Sessions Court had ignored the specific role attributed to Accused No.2 in the FIR and the statement of Dattatray Pawar, and the seriousness of the offence involving multiple stab wounds. The court held that there was a prima facie case against Accused No.2 and that the bail was granted without proper consideration of the evidence. The High Court allowed the application and cancelled the bail granted to Respondent No.2.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Cancellation of Bail - Section 439 CrPC - Prima Facie Case - The High Court cancelled bail granted to an accused charged with murder under Section 302 IPC, holding that the Sessions Court ignored the specific role attributed to the accused in the FIR and witness statements, and the seriousness of the offence involving multiple stab wounds. (Paras 1-10) B) Indian Penal Code - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Prima Facie Involvement - The court noted that the deceased suffered 13 injuries including 9 deep penetrating stab wounds, and the accused was specifically named in the FIR and witness statements as having stabbed the deceased, establishing a prima facie case for cancellation of bail. (Paras 3-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the bail granted to Respondent No.2 (Accused No.2) in a murder case should be cancelled on the ground that the Sessions Court ignored material evidence and the seriousness of the offence.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the application and cancelled the bail granted to Respondent No.2 (Accused No.2) by the Sessions Court.
Law Points
- Cancellation of bail
- Prima facie case
- Witness statements
- Section 439 CrPC
- Section 302 IPC
