1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 133 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 69 OF 2007 (Ramesh @ Mundi Ganesh Solanki .v. State of Maharashtra) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri Nitesh Samundre, Advocate for the applicant. Smt. K.S. Joshi, APP for the respondent/State. CORAM : MRS. V.K.TAHILRAMANI AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. 15TH MARCH, 2011. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant/original accused No.2 and learned APP. The applicant along with the other accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant is now seeking bail. Five eye witnesses i.e. the complainant Suresh Mankar (PW-1), Ravindra Bais (PW-2), Ashish Ghaiwat (PW-3), Mohan Chikhale (PW-4) and Suresh Sambalwar (PW-10) have witnessed the incident. They have stated that the applicant No.1 assaulted Atul (deceased) with razor. Deceased Atul sustained nine injuries in the incident. Most of the injuries are incised wounds. The learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the accused was not known to the witnesses, in such case, identification parade ought to have been held, however, no identification parade was held. He submitted that in such case identification of the accused by the witnesses directly in the Court cannot be relied upon. As far as this aspect is concerned, it is noticed that some of the witnesses may not have known the accused prior to the incident. However, the evidence of Suresh Sambalwar (PW-10) shows that he knew both the accused prior to the incident. This witness has also given particulars with regard to the 2 assault and the role played by the accused including the applicant. Thus, it is noticed that at least as far as this witness is concerned, there was no question of holding identification parade. Thus, looking to the evidence on record, we do not think this is a fit case to grant bail. The application is rejected. Looking to the fact that the applicant is in custody since 08.04.2005, the paper books be prepared as expeditiously as possible and in any event by 27th April, 2011. The appeal be placed on final hearing board on 2nd May, 2011. Application disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE *rrg.