1 APPA.1512-2011 acd IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1512 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 95 OF 2010 Chanda Pandurang Jadhav ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ...Respondent. ---- Mr. Milan Desai with Mr. Jayesh Gawde with Mr. Bharat Punekar,for the Applicant. Mr. P.S. Hingorani, A.P.P. for the State. ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE & M.L. TAHALIYANI, JJ. DATE : DECEMBER 20, 2011. P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer R.I. for life. The prosecution case is that the applicant was working as nurse in the 2 APPA.1512-2011 hospital and she was very close to the wife of the deceased and this fact was not liked by the deceased. According to the prosecution, therefore, the applicant called him on the date of incident to the hospital and thereafter she assaulted with knife on his stomach, as a result of which he succumbed to injuries and died. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant herself received number of injuries. These injuries are not superficial. Secondly, it is submitted that there is delay of two days in filing of the F.I.R. Thirdly, it is submitted that it is possible that the applicant may not be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 but may succeed in persuading the court that offence may fall under Section 301-I. It is submitted that the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future. The applicant deserves to be released on bail. It is also submitted that the applicant is young lady of 26 years of age and she has also undergone five years of sentence. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State, however, opposes the application for the bail. It is submitted that there are two witnesses who stated that dying declaration was given by the deceased after 3 APPA.1512-2011 two days and in the said dying declaration, he had mentioned the name of the applicant who had assaulted him with knife. Learned A.P.P. has invited our attention to the notes of evidence which was examined by the prosecution in support of the prosecution. 5. In our view, there is much substance in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. No explanation has been given for delay of two days in filing an F.I.R. The wife of the deceased had arrived immediately after the incident had taken place and yet the R.I.R. was registered after two days. Secondly, from evidence of PW-15 it has been established that the applicant had received following injuries: “(i) The right side breast 2 injuries (2 cm x 2 cm) on interior aspect (ii) Left side breast (1 cm x 1 cm) (iii) Right arm post aspect contusion present with bite mark (4 cm x 5 cm). (iv) Left side small injury on wrist on post aspect(1 cm x 1cm) (v) Right side wrist joint small mark present (1 cm x 1 cm).” 4 APPA.1512-2011 6. It cannot be stated that the said injuries are superficial, therefore, it appears that the prosecution has not in a position to disclose as to how the incident had taken place. 7. The applicant is in jail since last five years, and appeal is not likely to be heard in the near future. Taking into consideration all these peculiar facts and circumstances, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. Hence, we pass the following order: (i) The Applicant to be released on bail on execution of P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. (ii) The Applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station once in a month. 8. The Criminal Application is accordingly disposed of. (M.L. TAHALIYANI, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) 5 APPA.1512-2011