1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2301/2009 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. SV Sudrik , Adv. For Applicant; Mr. PM Shinde, APP for State. __ CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 27th July, 2009. ... . Heard learned Counsel and learned APP for State. 2) In Crime No.I-135/2009, registered at Topkhana Police Station, Ahmednagar, for an offence under Sections302, 201, 120(B) of IPC, the accused – Abhijit Bhalchandra Salvi who is in custody from 2nd April, 2009, seeks to be released on bail. 3) There were several litigations and controversies between Bhaskar Salvi and deceased Peter Ratan Salvi, aged; 75 Yrs., and on 29.3.2009, Adv. Peter Salvi was done to death, the nature of heinous 2 murder indicated, it was a contract killing. Accused nos. 1 and 2 Ranjeet and Kishor are stated to be the assailants, acted at the dictum of the master, present accused Abhijeet and his wife Harjit Kaur @ Babli @ Rut Abhijit Salvi. 4) In a matter of such nature, prima facie, it is difficult to have eye- witness. Only circumstances will have to be seen. The mobile conversation record, withdrawal from bank; possessing Rs. 80,100/- at the time of arrest, the long drawn litigation, the conversation between the present accused with his employees, having witnessed by Shamrao Manik Shete, a trusted employee of Dr. Bhalchandra Salvi, at this stage do not warrant to entertain the bail application. 5) Counsel for the applicant/accused invited my attention to the Judgment in the matter of Jayendra Saraswati Vs. State of Tamilnadu (2005 Crimes 113 (SC). The Counsel desires to 3 compare the case of Jayendra Saraswati with the present case, by interpreting what was the recovery in the matter of Jayendra Saraswati and the recovery at the behest or with the accused in the present case. Telephonic conversation, according to the counsel, is of no vital importance. 6) At this stage, Counsel for the applicant/accused seeks to withdraw the application, it is accordingly allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE bdv/cran2301.09