1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 209 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 941 OF 2007 Gopi Arjun Banjara ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 989 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 896 OF 2008 Krushanakumar @ Appa Baburao Yadav ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Khan Abdul Wahab for the Applicant in Criminal Application No. 209 of 2009 Ms. S.D. Khot for the Applicant in Criminal Application No. 989 of 2008 Mr. V.B. Konde Deshmukh, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and F.M. REIS, JJ. DATE: MARCH 31, 2009 P.C.:- 2 Heard the learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 2. The applicants have been convicted for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that this case depends on the testimony of P.Ws. 4 and 5, who were projected as eye-witnesses. But there can be doubts about the identification of the accused by these two witnesses. Admittedly, the witnesses were shown photographs even immediately before the identification parade was held, as has been stated by P.W.4 in his statement. The learned Sessions Judge, however, noted that P.W.4 had denied that he had been shown photographs. We have seen the statement of P.W.4, in which it is categorically stated as follows:- “..Before taking me to jail, photographs were shown to me. I went to jail for test identification parade at about 4.30 to 5 p.m.” Occurrence had taken place on 13th September, 2006, and identification parade was made more than a month thereafter, i.e., on 18th October, 2006, and the witness deposed in the Court on 20th April, 2007. Admittedly, there can be doubts about the identification of the accused persons by P.Ws. 4 and 5. Therefore, we feel that there has been doubt 3 about the identification of the accused. The applicants are in custody from the date they were arrested. 3. We, therefore, allow these applications, and direct that the applicants be released on bail, subject to personal bond in the amount of Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They shall also undertake before this Court that they will remain present in this Court whenever the appeals are listed for hearing. 4. The observations made hereinabove have been only made for the purpose of deciding these bail applications, and shall not be taken as expression of opinion about the merits of the appeals. BILAL NAZKI, J. F.M. REIS, J.