jpc ba1024-11.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1024 OF 2011 Vinod V. Rajbhar ... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. S.C. Kanojia, for the applicant Mr. J. P. Kharge, APP for the State CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 3rd August, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Kanojia, the learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. Kharge, the learned APP for the State. 2. Though a complete copy of the charge-sheet is not annexed to the bail application, the Investigating Officer, who is present before the Court, has tendered a copy of the same and the same is taken on record. 3. Name of the applicant as an assailant has been mentioned in the first information report and the role attributed to the applicant is of assaulting the deceased on head by an iron rod. The rod is said to have recovered in the course of investigation. The cause of death as revealed by the notes of the postmortem examination is due to head injury. jpc ba1024-11.sxw 2 4. The only point canvassed in support of the bail application is that the co-accused have been released on bail. However, the role attributed to the co-accused is not on par with that attributed to the present applicant. 5. Moreover, I am informed that the charge has already been framed and the witness summonses have been issued. The case is kept for recording of evidence on 8th August, 2011. The Investigating Officer agrees to keep the witnesses present before the Court on the date of hearing. It can, therefore, be expected that the trial should be over within a short time. 6. Under the circumstances, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Liberty to apply afresh for bail, should the trial be not over by the end of December, 2011. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)