pmw 1 BA1009-11-9 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1009 OF 2011 Sachin Ramchandra Bhor ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Rahul Arote, Advocate for Applicant. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP for State. CORAM- R.P. Sondur Baldota,J. DATE - 19th December, 2011. P.C. : 1. This application for bail is by the accused in C.R. No.567/2010 registered with Saki Naka Police Station for the offences punishable u/Secs. 302, 307, 326, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149 of IPC. The first application for bail by the applicant was dismissed by the Sessions Court by its order dated 6th May, 2011. 2. The brief case of the prosecution is that on 21st December, 2010 at about 11.00 p.m., the applicant herein called the deceased and asked him to meet him opposite Asalpha Village Bus Stop No.340 at Saki Naka. In response to the telephone call the deceased, accompanied by his friend pmw 2 BA1009-11-9 Sharad Pandey visited the place and found that the applicant was present there alongwith 3 to 4 other persons. The applicant attacked the deceased and assaulted him with the knife on the left side ribs. The co-accused of the applicant assaulted him with a sword on his head causing severe injuries to him. The deceased succumbed to the injuries about a month thereafter. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the FIR there was only one blow inflicted by the applicant upon the deceased and it was a blow by knife in the ribs. He further submits that the deceased died most probably because of the infection of the wounds or some complication of the wounds. 3. The prosecution story indicates that the whole incident was planned by the applicant herein. He had called the deceased to meet him at the particular place. The applicant had gone there armed with weapons to inflict injuries on him. Thus, there is direct evidence of involvement of the applicant. His intention to cause such injuries as would result into death is prima facie established. The facts also show rivalry between two groups. Therefore, this is not a fit case for grant of bail. The application is rejected. (R.P. SondurBaldota,J.)