IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1200/2009 [ Roshan Haridas Urade ..vs. State of Mah.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : S.R.DONGAONKAR, J. DATE : 12 th JUNE, 2009 Heard Shri Sirpurkar, Advocate, for the applicant and Shri Thakare, APP, for respondent State. This is an application for bail. The applicant is being prosecuted for the offence under Section 392 r/w Section 34 of the I.P.c. The main ground on which the applicant is claiming bail is the ground of parity as other two accused Sachin and Ritesh in the similar offence have been released on bail, one by this Court. Learned APP has opposed this application mainly on the ground which is mentioned in para 3 of the reply that the motor- cycle belonging to the applicant was seized. It was allegedly used in the commission of the offence and the number plate of the same was changed, so that while committing the offence the investigating authority would be misled. It is alleged that he had changed the number place from original R.T.O registration No. MH 34 T 1172 to MH 34 N 4792. Obviously this is a serious thing sufficient to call for rejection of the bail application of the applicant. However, it appears that the applicant has not been prosecuted for any offence under the Motor Vehicle Act in this behalf. One another circumstance raised by the learned APP is that golden ring was seized from the present applicant which was belonging to the complainant. I have considered the submissions of the learned APP. However, it appears that the persons against whom the similar allegations were raised i.e. Sachin and Ritesh, have been released by the Court, as pointed out, one by this Court. The allegations against this applicant are similar to those applicants. To specific query, it was informed that no application for cancellation of their bail has been preferred. In these circumstances, though the contentions raised against the applicant are serious, on the ground of parity, the applicant would be entitled for bail, however, subject to conditions. Applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety and P.R.Bond of Rs.25,000/- subject to conditions that he shall report at Police Station Mul, Distt. Chandrapur, on first Sunday of each month at 11 a.m until further orders or till the trial is over and shall not directly or indirectly tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not commit any offence in future. If any offence is committed by the applicant, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail with immediate effect. Bail in trial Court. Application disposed of. Hamdast granted. JUDGE Rvjalit