1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 2898 of 2009 Madhukar v. State of Maharashtra -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr M. Rai, Advocate for applicant Mr D.P. Thakare, APP for State Coram : A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 2nd September 2009 1. Heard Mr Rai, learned counsel for applicant and Mr Thakare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State. Applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 249/09 registered with Police Station, Yavatmal (City) under Sections 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Learned counsel for applicant contends that author of the crime is some other person and applicant has been falsely implicated. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, opposed bail application. He submitted that when 2 deceased Panjab objected applicant’s act of grazing cattle in his field, applicant assaulted him by means of axe due to which Panjab Gedam died later on. 3. Report of Natthu who was engaged by Panjab before two months indicates that he (Natthu) held axe and pushed applicant back after applicant made an assault. He has stated in FIR that blood was oozing from the head of Panjab and he received blood stains on his shirt and dhoti. He himself informed family members of deceased. There is no report from applicant alleging that in his presence complainant assaulted Panjab and complainant is author of crime. Post-mortem report and statements of witnesses recorded by investigating agency prima facie show accusing finger towards applicant. Looking to the probable punishment of life imprisonment or death, applicant may fleet from justice if released on bail. 4. For the reasons stated above, application is rejected. Trial Court shall, without getting influenced by any of the above observations, expedite hearing of trial. Judge. hsj