: 1 : APPA-1093-11 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1093 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1037 OF 2011 Shamrao Chanbasu Bagali ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Umdi Police Station, Umdi & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. Aniket Nikam for the Applicant. Mr. K.V. Saste, APP, for Respondent No.1-State. CORAM:V.M. KANADE & A.M. THIPSAY, JJ. DATED :15 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. This is an application filed by the Applicant for bail. The Applicant is convicted by the trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer R.I. for life. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 12th June, 2010, at about 9:30 p.m., the complainant Bhangareva Waghmare, the mother of the deceased, was at her house at Village Tikondi, Taluka Jath and, at that time, one Bhima Mang (PW-12) went to the house of the complainant Bhangareva and informed her that the Applicant Shamrao Bagali had stabbed Dnyaneshwar with knife in the house of Apparaya. Thereafter, the complainant and her husband Mahadeo Waghmare went to the spot and they saw that their son was lying on the floor and blood was oozing from his chest. Thereafter, they took the : 2 : APPA-1093-11 injured Dnyaneshwar to the hospital, where he was declared to be dead. Complaint was lodged by Bhangareva. An offence under Section 302 of the IPC was registered. Spot Panchanama was prepared, statements of the witnesses were recorded and the accused was arrested. His clothes were recovered at his instance and they were sent to the Chemical Analyzer. 3. Before the trial Court, prosecution examined 12 witnesses. Out of the 12 witnesses, Bhima Mang (PW-12) and Jayappa Katanale (PW-7) were the eye witnesses to the said incident. Jayappa Katanale (PW-7), however, turned hostile. Bhima Mang (PW-12), in his evidence, had stated that he was standing on the railway platform along with Jayappa Katanale (PW-7) and he saw the Applicant/Accused entering the house of Apparaya and, after some time, he noticed that the Applicant/Accused came back and there was a knife in his hand. When they (PW-7 and PW-12) went inside the house, they noticed that Dnyaneshwar had received stab injuries on the chest. The knife was recovered at the instance of the Applicant/Accused and also his clothes were recovered at his instance. The trial Court relied on the statement of Bhima Mang (PW-12) and the other material on record and convicted the Applicant/Accused. 4. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the evidence of Bhima Mang (PW-12) is not corroborated by Jayappa Katanale (PW-7). It is submitted that, therefore, the trial Court has convicted the Applicant only on the basis of the sole testimony of Bhima Mang (PW-12). It is also submitted that there was no light in the house where deceased was staying and, as such, Bhima Mang (PW-12) could not have seen the accused. Secondly, it was submitted that there was a quarrel between Bhima Mang (PW-12) and the complainant and PW-12 was also assaulted by the villagers on the same night. It is submitted that, therefore, the villagers had suspected Bhima : 3 : APPA-1093-11 Mang (PW-12). It is also submitted that, so far as recovery of knife and clothes is concerned, both the witnesses had turned hostile. It is submitted that, under these circumstances, the Applicant was entitled to be released on bail. 5. The submission made by the learned Counsel for the Applicant cannot be accepted. The trial Court, after going through the evidence on record, has convicted the accused and has given cogent reasons for relying on the testimony of Bhima Mang (PW-12) and, at this stage, therefore, it will not be possible to go through the entire record and see whether prima facie case made out was right or not. The submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Applicant can be considered at the time of hearing of the main Appeal. Hence, at this stage, it will not be possible to grant bail to the Applicant. 6. The evidence of Bhima Mang (PW-12) had been corroborated by the medical evidence and the Doctor, who performed the post-mortem, had stated that there were three injuries, stab wounds, on the chest of the deceased, which is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Normally, while considering the question of grant of bail, this Court is not expected to appreciate and go through the evidence on record. However, in order to meet the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant, it was necessary to go through the evidence on record. Hence, the Application for bail is rejected. 7. Hearing of the Criminal Appeal is expedited. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)