E-Paper
Bombay HC rejects pre-arrest bail of 6 army men accused of colleague’s murder
The Bombay high court (HC) recently rejected the anticipatory bail application (ABA) of six army personnel booked for the alleged murder of their colleague
The Bombay high court (HC) recently rejected the anticipatory bail application (ABA) of six army personnel booked for the alleged murder of their colleague. The case was registered by the victim’s wife as she doubted the claims of the colleagues that the man had died by drowning while they were at a picnic.
The court held that as the circumstances surrounding the death of the man needed to be ascertained and the custodial interrogation of the six accused was necessary, their ABA cannot be granted.
The single bench of justice Sarang Kotwal, while hearing the bail applications filed by the six personnel working in the army, was informed by advocate Gaurav Parkar that they were the friends of army man Ganesh Thokal and that there was no animosity among them. Parkar submitted that Thokal died during a picnic, and if there was any dispute among them, he would not have accompanied the accused.
According to the first information report (FIR) filed by Thokal’s wife Rupali, her husband had joined the army in 2003 and retired in July 2020, following which the couple started living in Ahmednagar district’s Kamargaon. When the friends had visited the couple, Thokal asked one of the accused, Bhagwan Yadav, to return the ₹1 lakh which the latter owed the victim. A dispute arose between them as Yadav was allegedly not returning the amount.
Last September, Yadav called Thokal to Pune and the accused and the victim went to picnic at Murud-Kashid. In her complaint, Rupali stated that she spoke to Thokal over the phone twice, but he did not respond to a third call on the next day. The day after that, Thokal’s body was brought home in an ambulance, and Rupali was told that her husband had drowned while swimming.
However, a black mark on Thokal’s eye and neck prompted Rupali to doubt the reason stated behind her husband’s death and she lodged a murder complaint against the six men.
When the ABA came up for hearing, the bench sought the opinion of the medical officer on the injury marks. The medical officer submitted that when Thokal’s body was brought out of the water, it did not have the marks and that it did not occur due to post-mortem procedure.
“These bruises appear after sustaining injury by blunt force application. Sometimes ecchymosis [bruise] may not appear until after death. Sometimes, they are delayed by one or two days. When a contusion has been caused a few hours or a day before death, they do not occur due to post-mortem violence,” said the report.
Based on the opinion of the medical officer, justice Kotwal observed that the injury near the eye was as a result of blunt force and needed to be investigated.
As there was a dispute between the victim and one of the accused over money, the reason and circumstances leading to Thokal’s death would require custodial interrogation and hence, their ABA was being rejected. The court also vacated the interim protection from arrest considering the seriousness of the incident and the urgent need for custodial interrogation, and disposed of the applications.
