IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1967/2009 (Sau. Prajapati Sahebrao Thoke ..vs.. State of Mahahrastra ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : S.R.DONGAONKAR, J. DATE : 11 th JUNE, 2009 Heard Shri Gedam, Advocate, for the applicant and Shri Mandpe, APP, for respondent State. There is office objection regarding non-tallying of the name of the applicant in the application and that of F.I.R. The applicant to make necessary correction in the application. The only evidence that is pressed into service against the applicant is that, the eye witnesses Sheikh Nazir, Bhaskar Hari Thorat, Jainbulla and Fatma Pravin Khan had seen the applicant carrying the deceased Mohini at the relevant time prior to the alleged death of the deceased. The case rests on circumstantial evidence. This is the only circumstance which is pressed into service against the applicant. It appears that the alleged noticing of the deceased with the applicant by these witnesses is near the house of the applicant and the deceased. Therefore, ex facie, the circumstances does not appear to be sufficient to lead to the conclusion of the guilt of the accused. No other circumstances are pressed into service in this regard, as such, the applicant being lady, would be entitled to bail. However, subject to conditions. The applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety and P.R.Bond of Rs. 15,000/- subject to conditions that she shall not directly or indirectly tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall attend the trial regularly. Application disposed of. Bail in trial Court. JUDGE Rvjalit