1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Criminal Application No.131 of 2009 IN Criminal Appeal No.486 of 2008 Shri Harish Sadashiv Khade .. ..Applicant v/s. The State of Mah. .. ..Respondent Mrs.P.P.Kakade for Applicant. Mrs.M.M. Deshmukh, APP for State. ---- CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, JJ. Dated : 21st August, 2009 P.C. : 1.We have heard Mrs.Kakade, the learned Counsel for the Applicant-accused No.3. 2.In Sessions Case No.177 of 2007, all the four accused came to be convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the said order is under challenge in Criminal Appeal No.486 of 2008 filed by all the four accused. Criminal Application No.1189 of 2008 was filed for bail and it came to be rejected on 14.11.2008. Mrs.Kakade, the learned Counsel for the Applicant-accused No.3, states that the present Applicant did not file any earlier application for bail. 2 3.We have noted that the prosecution examined in all 12 witnesses, whereas the Defence had examined 3 witnesses. The incident had taken place on 22.11.2006 between 11 and 11.30 p.m. and Ravindra Tamhankar was murdered. As per the prosecution case, P.W.1, P.W.8 and P.W.9 were the eye witnesses and P.W.9 turned hostile. From the medical evidence, it is proved that Ravindra Tamhankar died a homicidal death. We have gone through the depositions of P.W.1, P.W.8 and P.W.9 and we are satisfied that there is no case made out to release the Applicant on bail by suspending the order of sentence under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 4.Hence, the Application is rejected. [SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.] [B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.]