1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1609 OF 2009 1.Sanjeevkumar Mallikarjun Shingare .. 2.Vijaykumar Shivshankar Badagar .. 3.Umesh Tuljappa Talwar .. Applicants. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr.Kuldeep S.Patil for the applicants. Mrs.P.P.Shinde A.P.P. for the State. Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 17th June, 2009 P.C. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking bail in C.R.No.124 of 2008 of Akkalkot Police Station, District Solapur. The said crime has been registered against the applicants and others for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections sections 302, 427, 120-B r/w 34 of IPC. 3. The prosecution case, in short, is that one jeep had ramped into motor cycle and two persons, including Ankush More, riding the motor cycle died on the spot. Applicant No.1 was driving the jeep and applicant nos.2 and 3 were also in the jeep at the relevant time. After this incident, the son of the deceased filed a complaint on suspicion that the present applicants and other accused were responsible for the death of those two persons and that a conspiracy was hatched by them to kill Ankush More. According to the prosecution, the father of co-acccused was 2 murdered by Ankush More – the deceased in the present case in 1999 and he was convicted by the trial Court for the offence punishable under section 302 of IPC. The appeal against conviction, however, ended in acquittal. It is alleged that the co- accused had taken oath to take revenge of the death of their father by eliminating the deceased – Ankush More and had accordingly gave a contract to the present applicants to kill him. They had agreed to pay Rs.1,50,000/- to the present applicants for killing Ankush More. According to the prosecution the jeep was, accordingly, purchased in the name of other persons and monies were paid by the co-accused. The present applicants in furtherance of the conspiracy ramped the jeep into motor cycle pretending it to be an accident. I have perused the material placed on record and more particularly the statement of Shrishail Gojraj to whom extra judicial confession was made by the applicants. Having considered the material on record, in my opinion, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on bail. Hence the application is rejected. 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.)