1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2110 OF 2009 Pappu @ Anna Rajaram Vitkar .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr.Amol A.Deshpande for the applicant. Mr.K.V.Saste A.P.P. for the State. Coram : D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 13TH JULY, 2009 P.C. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in C.R.No.389 of 2009 of Dehu Road Police Station, District Pune. The crime has been registered against the applicant and eight others for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 302, 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC. 3. The applicant and eight others allegedly hatched a conspiracy to kill Vaibhav Mehtre and accordingly 4-5 accused including Sunil Pisal, Vikas Kale and Praveen Pradhan committed his murder on 6th December, 2008 at 7.30 pm. Insofar as the present applicant is concerned, according to the prosecution, he also participated in commission of the offence. 2 The incident was witnessed by one Rajesh Jadhav. Though, he did not know the accused, he has given description of all the accused who killed Vaibhav Mehtre. Test identification parade was conducted. Admittedly, this witness did not identify the present applicant. It appears that all the accused persons had gone in sumo vehicle. There is a statement of the driver – Vikas Prakash Kale on record. From perusal of his statement and the memorandum of test identification parade it is clear that he also did not identify the present applicant as one of the persons who was in the sumo vehicle. My attention was also drawn to the statement of one Kiran Tambe to whom an extra judicial confession was made by the co-accused – Sunil Pisal, Kiran Randive and Praveen Pradhan. Even these accused did not name the present applicant. There are statements of other witnesses who state that the name of the present applicant also appeared in the newspaper “Pudhari”. It is only on the basis of the news item they seem to have named the present applicant as one of the accused persons, who allegedly killed the deceased. It further appears from the statement of the co- accused that when they decided to surrender they requested the present applicant also to surrender. Apart from this there is no other material on record to connect the applicant to the incident of murder. Having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case and 3 nature of evidence against the applicant I am inclined to enlarge him on bail. Hence the following order: The applicant to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties to make up the said amount, subject to the condition that the applicant shall report to the concerned police station on every Wednesday and Saturday between 6 pm and 7 pm for a period of four months and thereafter on every Saturday between 6 pm and 7 pm till conclusion of the trial. While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. Application is disposed of. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)