[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.1575 OF 2008 The State of Maharshtra ..Applicant Vs. Shri.James @ Jumbo John Fernandes ..Respondent ... Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh Advocate for Applicant None for Respodnent though served. ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JULY 17, 2008 DATE : JULY 17, 2008 DATE : JULY 17, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned A.P.P. for the Applicant-State. None appears for the Respondent though served. 2. The State has preferred this application for cancellation of bail granted to the Respondent-accused. By order dated 8.1.2008 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gr.Bombay, Borivali Division, Dindoshi-Goregaon, Greater Bombay granted bail to the Respondent No.1 in CR No. 51 of 2007 of Kasturba Marg Police Station. The said case is under Sections 302, 393 and 394 [-2-] r.w. 34 of IPC and under Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act. 3. The learned Sessions Judge has granted bail to applicant no.1 on the ground that there is no eye witness to the alleged incident and the case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is further observed therein that there is no eye witness to connect the Respondent-accused with the crime. These observations made by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge are entirely wrong and erroneous. The learned APP has pointed out that there are two eye witnesses to the incident i.e. Mitesh Shah and Mahesh Vyash. Both these witnesses have identified the present Respondent in the test identification parade. Mahesh has specifically stated that the Respondent was on motor-cycle and he had caught hold of Mahendra and assaulted him. Mahendra died in the incident. Thus, it is seen that the learned Sessions Judge has granted bail relying on erroneous grounds. Such an order cannot be allowed to stand the order deserves to be set aside. 4. The learned APP has pointed out that besides the present case, the respondent-accused is [-3-] involved in 12 other cases, which are as under: --------------------------------------------------- Sr. Police Station C.R.Nos. and Offences No. --------------------------------------------------- 1. Dindoshi 307/95, 302 r.w. 34 of IPC 2. --"-- 262/03, 454, 457, 380, 427 r.w. 34 of IPC 3. --"-- 4/04, 454, 457, 380, 511 r.w. 34 of IPC. 4. --"-- 178/04, 454, 457, 380, r.w. 34 of IPC 5. --"-- 181/04, 454, 457, 380 r.w. 34 of IPC. 6. --"-- 187/04, 454, 457, 380 r.w. 34 of IPC. 7. --"-- 226/04, 454, 457, 380 r.w. 34 of IPC. 8. --"-- 230/04, 454, 457, 380, 511 of IPC 9. --"-- 239/04, 457, 459, 380 r.w. 34 of IPC 10. Kasturba Marg 14/04, 454, 380 of IPC. 11. Kasturba Marg 277/06, 454, 380 of IPC. 12. Malad 445/03, 454, 457, 380 of IPC. ------------------------------------------------- 5. Looking to all the facts, this is a fit case to grant this application for cancellation of bail [-4-] granted to the Respondent-accused. Hence, the order dated 8.1.2008 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gr.Bombay, Borivali Division, Dindoshi-Goregaon, is set aside and bail granted to the applicant is cancelled. 6. Application is allowed and is disposed of accordingly. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]