{1} criapln2358-25.doc drp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2358 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 487 OF 2025 Ankush Laxman Wagh APPLICANT Age – 32 years, Occ – Agriculture R/o Pardari Road, Chincholi, Taluka & District - Aurangabad VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr. Satej S. Jadhav, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. A. S. Shinde, APP for Respondent - State Mr. I. K. Wagh, Advocate for the informant ....… [CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, & SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J. J.] DATE : 13 th AUGUST, 2025 ORDER : 1. By this Application, filed under section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Applicant seeks suspension of his substantive sentence of life imprisonment imposed on him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Sessions Case No. 357 of 2021. 2. Applicant – Accused, along with his brother and father, were charged for commission of offence punishable under section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. {2} criapln2358-25.doc 3. Prosecution case is that PW-1 Babasaheb Wagh is the informant in the case. He is residing at Pardari Road, Chincholi, Taluka and District - Aurangabad with father Ramrao, Mother Kadubai, Brother Krishna and wife Kavita. The family has total 14 Acres of land in different Gut numbers. There were disputes about the boundary (Bandh) pertaining to lands Gut No. 25 and 52 between the family of the Accused and the family of the informant. Prior to 15 days of the incident, the informant, along with his brother Krishna (deceased) was removing thorny bushes from land Gut No. 52. At that time, his uncle Laxman (Accused No.3) and cousins Uddhav (Accused No.1) and Ankush (Accused No.2 - present Applicant) came there with a view to assault the informant and his brother. They had brought one axe with them. At that time, they raised a quarrel however, the informant and his brother left the place in order to avoid further complications. On 5th June, 2020, at about 2.00 p.m. the informant had gone to his field, land gut No. 25. At that time, his elder brother Krishna was ploughing the field of Prabhakar Wagh with tractor, which is adjacent to the land Gut No. 25. When the informant was collecting dry leaves of bajara crop, at 4.30 p.m. his brother Krishna (deceased) took tractor in land Gut No.25. At that time, Laxman (Accused No.3), Uddhav (Accused No.1) and Ankush {3} criapln2358-25.doc (Accused No.2 – Applicant) were also present there and they were ploughing their land, through Ramesh Rathod (PW-6). At about 5.15 p.m. Laxman (Accused No.3), his sons Uddhav (Accused No.1) and Ankush (Accused No.2 – Applicant) started abusing Krishna (deceased). The informant could hear their conversation. Krishna stopped his tractor and went near the common boundary to ask them as to what had happened. That time, the Accused started beating Krishna. Uddhav (Accused No.1) threatened to kill him and gave 2 to 3 blows of axe. Krishna shouted and fell down. The informant started running towards Krishna to save him, but that time, Accused No.2 Ankush (Applicant) started running towards him and said “gk rj xsyk vkrk ;kP;kdMs igk”. Other two accused also started running towards the informant. Therefore, he ran away from the spot. 4. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined total 10 witnesses. The Trial Court has convicted Accused as aforesaid. 5. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant, learned APP for the State and learned Advocate for the informant. Perused the Record. 6. Learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that, except the evidence of PW-1, there is nothing on record to show {4} criapln2358-25.doc involvement of the Applicant in the present crime. Trial Court has, therefore, erred in convicting the Applicant with the aid of section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that, the Applicant has good case on merits and the Applicant hopes to succeed, and hence, his substantive sentence of imprisonment be suspended pending the hearing and final disposal of the Appeal. 7. Learned APP and learned Advocate for the informant strenuously opposed the Application stating that there is cogent and reliable evidence of PW-1, which shows active involvement of the Applicant in the crime. He has exhorted Accused No.1 to kill the informant. They further submit that though independent eyewitness PW-9 turned hostile, in his proved statement, portion marked “B”, presence of the Applicant is stated at the time of the incident. Learned APP has pointed out that, blood stained clothes of the present Applicant were found. Therefore, his presence is very much there at the time of the incident. Therefore, according to them, the Trial Court is justified in convicting the Applicant. They submit that this is not a fit case to grant bail to the Applicant. 9. Perusal of the record indicates that PW-1, the informant, has attributed a role to the Applicant that, he exhorted Accused {5} criapln2358-25.doc No.1, by saying that, ‘his brother is killed, now they should see him’ and accordingly, all the Accused persons started coming towards him and, therefore, he ran away. Admittedly, there were disputes between the families of the Accused and the informant and, therefore, false implication of the Applicant cannot be ruled out. Admittedly, another eyewitness PW-6 has not stated presence of the Applicant at the time of the incident. Even PW-9, another eyewitness has turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution case. Merely because portion marked “B” is proved in the cross examination of PW-9 conducted by learned APP in the Trial Court, that by itself is not sufficient to convict the Applicant in the present case. So far as blood stains found on the clothes of the Applicant are concerned, the reports about the blood stains are inconclusive. It is a matter of common knowledge that agriculturists may have blood stains on their clothes, but that cannot be a sole circumstance to warrant conviction of the Applicant. 10. Prima facie, we are of the view that the Applicant has good case on merits and the Applicant has high hopes of success in the Appeal. Moreover, the Applicant was on bail during the trial. The Application, therefore, deserves to be allowed. In the result, following order {6} criapln2358-25.doc ORDER A. The Criminal Application is allowed. B. Substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the Applicant - Ankush Laxman Wagh by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Sessions Case No.357 of 2021 is suspended pending the hearing and final disposal of the Criminal Appeal. C. Applicant be released on executing Personal Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount. [ SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE ] [ NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ] JUDGE JUDGE drp/criapln2358-25.doc