1 MNM IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1103 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.943 OF 2009 Mohd. Razzak Munshi Razzak Shaikh ...Applicant/Appellant (Orig. Accused No.3) Vs. The State of Maharashtra (at the instance of V.P.Road Police Station in C.R.No.31/2008) ...Respondent Mr.Santosh Deshpande, Advocate for the Applicant Mrs. A.A.Mane, A.P.P for the State CORAM: SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED: 3RD DECEMBER, 2009 P.C. 1.The applicant applies for bail. He has been convicted along with 2 others for the offences punishable under Sections 392, 397 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. The prosecution case shows a robbery in a commercial premises of a businessman evidenced by 3 witnesses of P.W.1, 9 and 10. Their versions are similar except for the time of the offence. 2 2.It is contended that the accused was shown to the complainant by the police before the T.I.P. The T.I.P therefore, may be rendered bad. However, the identification of the accused upon being shown by the police remains. It cannot be understood how the complainant who is a businessman would identify a wrong man at the instance of police when his shop has been burgled. All these aspects may be taken up in the Appeal. However, the evidence of 3 witnesses makes out a case of robbery in a commercial premises. The sentence upon conviction is for only 3 years. Hence, it is contended that half the sentence is undergone. The applicant has been in custody since 14th March 2008. 3.The learned special P.P says that 8 C.Rs., are registered against him. The crime is prone to repetition. 4.Application for bail is rejected. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)