1 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 925 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1347 OF 2008 Satter Yunus Zharekari ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1117 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1347 OF 2008 Mahiboob Yunus Zharekari and anr. .. Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Senior Advocate i/by Ms. Swapna Kode for applicants. Mrs.M.M. Deshmukh, APP for State. CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, JJ. October 08, 2009. P.C. 1. We have heard Mr. Mundargi, the learned Senior Counsel with Ms. Kode for the applicants. Criminal Application No. 925 of 2009 has been filed by accused no.4 and Criminal Application No. 1117 of 2009 has been filed by accused nos.1 and 3 for being released on bail during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No. 1347 of 2008. 2 2. In Sessions Case No. 130 of 2007 six accused persons were put on trial and all of them have been convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 498-A read with Section 34 of IPC. Accused Nos. 2 and 5 have challenged the said order of conviction and sentence in Criminal Appeal No. 1291 of 2008 and they have been released on bail by this court. The deceased was the wife of accused no.6 and she met an unnatural death within less than six moths of her marriage and at the matrimonial home, on account of 100% burn injuries on 21/2/2007. It was the case of the defence that the deceased was suffering from schizophrenia and accused nos.1, 4 and 6 were not at home when the incident had taken place and it was further contended that it was not a homicidal death. Undoubtedly, the prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence and in all 11 witnesses have been examined. We have perused the Inquest Panchanama (Exh. 18) and the Spot Panachanama (Exh.19) as well as the depositions of PW 2 – Dr. Sunil Lavate, PW 8 – Amine Zarekari and PW 10 – Mohammad Shaikh. We are not inclined to accept, prima facie, that the deceased died the suicidal death. Though accused nos. 2 and 5 have been released on bail by this court, the present applicants are not entitled for the benefit of parity and, therefore, in our opinion, there is no case made out to release any of the applicants on bail. 3. Hence, the applications are rejected. Liberty to apply for fixing early date of hearing in both the appeals as soon as the paper book is ready. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI,J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.)