1 Criminal Application No131/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.131 OF 2011 Dinkar s/o Uttam Pawara ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri S.V. Natu, Advocate for the applicant Shri K.M. Suryawanshi, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 18th January, 2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard. The learned Sessions Judge, by order dated 18.12.2010, acquitted the accused in Sessions Trial No.18/2010 for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused during the trial was in custody. The learned Sessions Judge directed Superintendent of Jail to to release the accused if not required in any other case, after a period of six months from 18.12.2010 as he has failed to give bail under Section 437 (A) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned counsel questions legality of this order. 2 Criminal Application No131/2011 2. I find, the learned Judge was at error in issuing such directions. It will be curtailing even liberty of the accused. The purport of Section 437 (A) of the Criminal Procedure Code by virtue of amendment in Criminal Procedure Code is mistakenly coined in the impugned order. The accused/ applicant, in the set of above facts, deserves to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. bond and surety in the sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand). The arrangement of bail to remain in force for a period of six months. Application allowed. K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE fmp/cri131.11