1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLCIATION NO. 1337 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 907 OF 2007 Siddeshwar Ramkrushna Bhange ... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent. Mr. Sandeep S. Salunkhe for the Applicant Mr. A.A. Mane, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and S.A. BOBDE, JJ. DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 2008. P.C.:- Heard the learned counsel for the applicant-appellant as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. The appellant-accused has been convicted for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The order of conviction and sentence was passed on 28th June, 2007. He has also been fined Rs.1,000/-. 3. The case of the prosecution against the accused was that he 2 had committed the murder of his wife. They were married for more than 20 years and had 7 children. There was no direct evidence in the matter, and most of the witnesses turned hostile. The prosecution relied on two circumstances for the purpose of getting conviction. One of the circumstances was that the accused and deceased, being husband and wife, were living together in the same house. The other circumstance was that the blood found on the clothes of the accused and on the weapon, by which the offence was committed, belonged to the blood group which was the blood group of the deceased. The weapon was recovered on a disclosure made by the accused from the house of the accused. 4. Prima facie, we have found that all these circumstances were not proved beyond doubt. For instance, with regard to the first circumstance, the learned Sessions Judge was of the opinion that the presence of accused No. 1, at the material time, is quite probable, which would mean that the learned Sessions Judge was not sure, on the basis of evidence, that accused No. 1 was present at the place of occurrence at the time of occurrence. Secondly, though there is evidence that blood was found on the weapon and also on the clothes of the accused, 3 which belonged to the group of blood, which was the blood group of the deceased; but we have not seen in the judgment as to whether any test of blood group of the appellant-accused was also done, and whether his blood group was same as that of his wife or he had a different blood group. 5. In this view of the matter, we feel that this is a case for grant of bail, particularly in view of the fact that criminal appeals in this Court, which are now being heard, pertain to the year 2002. Therefore, we direct that on payment of fine of Rs.1,000/-, as directed by the learned Sessions Judge, and on furnishing personal bond in the amount of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties in like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, the appellant-accused shall be released on bail. He shall appear in this Court as and when the appeal is listed for hearing. 6. The observations made in this order with regard to the judgment, sentence and conviction are only made for the purpose of examining whether the accused was entitled to bail or not, and shall not be taken as final expression of opinion by this Court about the merits of the case. 7. Application is accordingly allowed. BILAL NAZKI, J. 4 S.A. BOBDE, J.