..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3195 OF 2008 Sudhish Raja Devraj Nadara. ..Applicant. Versus State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents. .... Mr.S.K.Raj, Adv. for the applicant. Mrs.A.A.Mane, APP, for the State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 3rd December, 2008. DATED : 3rd December, 2008. DATED : 3rd December, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in C.R. No.171 of 2007 of Karad City police station. The said case is under Section 395 of Indian Penal Code. 3. On 15.5.2007 the complainant and other witnesses were in their courier office. At that time, the applicant along with four other accused entered into the office and they looted property worth about six and half lakh. At the time of ..(2).. dacoity, two of the persons were armed with sickle. 4. In the TIP, five witnesses including the complainant have identified the applicant as having taken part in he said incident. The learned APP has pointed out that the applicant is also involved in C.R. No.757 of 2007 of Nampalli police station, Hyderabad (Andhra Pradesh State). The said case is under Section 394 of Indian Penal Code. 5. Looking to the facts of this case and the antecedents of the accused, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant bail. Application for bail is rejected. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)