:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 998 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 998 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 998 OF 2008 IN IN IN CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.511 OF 2008 APPEAL NO.511 OF 2008 APPEAL NO.511 OF 2008 Ashok Ramkumar Tiwari ..Applicant V/s The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Mr.Vaibhav Sathav for the applicant Mr.A.S. Gadkari, APP for the State CORAM : S.B.MHASE & A.A. SAYED JJ. DATE : 17TH NOVEMBER, 2008 P.C. 1. Heard. 2. The learned Counsel for the applicant produced the order from the Criminal Application No.500/2008 in Criminal Appeal No.416 of 2008 and submitted that on the ground of parity the present applicant be released. 3. We have looked into the judgment and we find that both the accused are not on parity. The released accused above referred has inflicted injury to the complainant who is alive and it was an offence :2: under section 307 of IPC, while the present applicant had caught hold of the deceased Santosh Shinde and Amol Deokar gave blows of the sword as a result of which deceased succumbed to death. If this accused/applicant had not caught hold of the deceased, probably the deceased could have saved himself or could have run away in order to avoid the blows to the deceased. Thus the accused has rendered the services by catching hold of the deceased. There are multiple blows on the body of the deceased. Therefore, prima-facie we find that the accused-applicant is responsible for the offence under section 302 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code. 4. The application stands rejected. ( A.A. SAYED, J.) A.A. SAYED, J.) A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.B. (S.B. (S.B. MHASE, J.) MHASE, J.) MHASE, J.)