1 APPA 408/11 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.408 OF 2011 IN APPEAL NO.1064 OF 2008 Balu Sitaram Kamble : Applicant. versus The State of Maharashtra : Respondent. Mr. Harshad V Bhadbhade for the applicant. Mr. J P Yagnik, APP for the State/Respondent. CORAM : NARESH H PATIL & K U CHANDIWAL, JJ DATE : 02nd August 2011 P.C. 1 Heard. 2 Accused/applicant, who is a life convict, seeks release on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the incident, if any, has occurred at a spur of movement. The accused/applicant had no intention to eliminate the deceased. The applicant/accused is the only earning member in his family aged about 26 years and languishing in custody since last five years (precisely from 9/3/2006). 2 APPA 408/11 3 The learned APP, while rebutting the contentions, points out that there is account of three eye witnesses implicating the accused who assaulted the deceased with axe (Article 11). C.A. Report (Exhibit 13) is imperative and to be looked into. 4 Though the learned counsel for the accused/applicant criticized the evidence of the eye witnesses branding them as interested, however, the facts as prima facie projected is that the eye witnesses appear to be naturally present. Injured also implicates the accused having assaulted deceased with axe. Incident is not disputed by accused. Innocuous embellishment in narration need not be magnified at this prima facie stage. No case for bail is made out. Application is rejected. (K U CHANDIWAL, J.) (NARESH H PATIL, J.)