abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4099 OF 2007 Makarand Bhausaheb Shirsat .. Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.S.K. Keswani i/b Mr.R.S. Dubey for the applicant. Mr.D.P. Adsule, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 13TH FEBRUARY 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicant seeks bail in connection with an offence registered with Manpada Police Station, Dombivli under C.R. No.I-147/2007 punishable under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(25) of the Arms Act and sections 37 and 135 of the Bombay Police Act. 3. The prosecution case in short is that the applicant along with four other persons had been - 2 - threatening Ramdas Patil, who runs a lodging and boarding in the name of Varsha Lodging and Boarding at Katai Pipeline. The accused and others had been going to the lodge of Ramdas and demanding money with the threat that if the money was not paid, they would not permit the lodge to run. On many occasions, money was recovered by the applicant and others in this fashion. Thereafter in the night between 31st May and 1st June 2007, the applicant along with 7-8 others came to the lodge. One of the persons took out a pistol and pointed it at manager Tukaram Bhote and inquired where the owner Ramdas was. The applicant and others were having sticks. The manager Tukaram Bhote was assaulted and a sum of Rs.7,000/- was robbed from the counter and a mobile telephone was taken away forcibly. One of the assailants, who was left behind, was then overpowered by the staff and handed over to the police. FIR was lodged. Out of Rs.7,000/- robbed from the counter, Rs.1,000/- were recovered from the present applicant. 4. Learned A.P.P. submitted that the applicant is a habitual offender and in fact he was arrested in connection with a crime registered at C.R. No.189/2005 with Ramnagar Police Station, Dombivli punishable under sections 326, 504 read with 34 of the I.P.C. 5. Taking into consideration the gravity of the - 3 - offence and also the fact that the offence of robbery is committed with the use of fire arm and the antecedents of the applicant, in my view, the applicant is not entitled to bail. 6. Previously the applicant had made an application for bail to the Sessions Court at Kalyan. Vide his order dated 17th August 2007 the learned Additional Sessions Judge for cogent reasons, has rejected the said application. I see no reason to take a view different than the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge. In the circumstances, the application is rejected. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)