1 apln120-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.120 OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra ..Applicant. Vs. Mohammed Azim Mohammed Salim @ Ajju. ..Respondent. .... Mr.K.V. Saste, A.P.P. for the Applicant-State. Mrs.S.A. Dhamale, Advocte for orig. complainant. .... CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED : 28TH JULY, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard rival submissions for sometime on this application for cancellation of regular bail. 2. The order dated 18.11.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-1, Malegaon, District - Nashik is challenged by the State. Respondent/accused No.2 is facing the charges 2 apln120-10 punishable under Section 302 read with Section 120B of Indian Penal Code. Admittedly, the entire case of prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and there is no direct eye witness. There are few witnesses mentioning that some unknown persons were accompanying the main accused/assailants prior to the incident of assault on the victim. However, name of present respondent is not specifically taken by any witness. Moreover, according to the learned A.P.P. said witnesses have identified the respondent in the police station as the person along with others was accompanying the main accused prior to the incident. 3. This material in itself is not sufficient to quash the earlier order of bail granted by the Additional Sessions Judge-1, Malegaon. Said bail order was passed on 18.11.2009 and almost eight months are already passed. The investigation is already over and the matter is fixed for framing of charge and for trial. Though admittedly there is no reasoning given in the main order of bail as to the merits of the material alleged against the applicant, still there is 3 apln120-10 nothing to set aside the order of bail. Hence, present application is disposed of with following order :- :: O R D E R :: [i] Criminal Application No.120 of 2010 for cancellation of bail stands rejected and accordingly disposed of. (A.R.JOSHI,J.) PPD