BA-926-11==.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.926 OF 2011 Mohammad Naeem Fakir ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Dadabhai Navroji Nagar Police Station ... Respondent Ms. Anjali Patil for the Applicant. Mr. M.R. Tidke for the Respondent. The I.O. is present in person. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 9 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. I have gone through the Bail Application and the annexures thereto. 3. Undoubtedly, the co-accused have been released on bail. However, the role attributed to the Applicant is more severe and direct than that of the co- accused. In fact, the learned Counsel for the Applicant concedes that, as per the version of the Investigating Agency, the Applicant is supposed to be the person BA-926-11==.sxw 2 Dixit who inflicted a fatal blow on the chest of the deceased. The contention that the offence in question would be one punishable under Section 304 of the IPC and not under Section 302 of the IPC cannot be accepted at this stage. 4. It is true that there are no antecedents and that the co-accused have been released on bail. Under these circumstances, though I am not inclined to release the Applicant at this stage, I think it fit to direct the trial to be expeditiously held. In the event of the trial not being over within the stipulated time, the prayer for bail can be considered afresh. 5. The Bail Application is rejected. 6. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and complete it within a period of four months from today. 7. Liberty to the Applicant to apply afresh for bail, should the trial be not over within that time. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]