1 Criminal Application No.997/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.997 OF 2011 Shahaji s/o Chivala Chavan ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri Milind Patil, Advocate for applicant ShriV.H. Dighe, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 25th March, 2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard. In an offence in Crime No.77/2010, registered at Kaij Police Station, District Beed, the accused/ applicant desires bail. 2. The driver of the truck which was used for assistance to commit the dacoity has informed the police names of the occupant and consequently, the accused/ applicant was apprehended. Based on his statement, a discovery of gold ornaments was made. Learned counsel submits, the other accused/ applicants in said crime are released on bail by the learned Sessions Judge by order dated 22.7.2010. However, it is not so done for the present 2 Criminal Application No.997/2011 accused/ applicant. 3. Perusal of order of learned Sessions Judge in Misc. Criminal Application No.238/2010 illustrate, application of present accused/ applicant Shahaji and Shivaji was rejected. Thereafter the accused/ applicant approached this Court vide Criminal Application No.3996/2010 and by order dated 20.10.2010, the application was rejected. The applicant again moved the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Ambajogai, said application was rejected on 28.12.2010. 4. Learned counsel has doubted the discovery statement pointing that such gold ornaments can easily be located and, therefore, it will not be incriminating circumstance against the accused/ applicant. The counsel insistently harped at the incorrect truck number recorded in succession by almost all the witnesses and he attributes that due to wrong identification of the truck which was shown at the police station, the accused needs benefit. 5. It was the truck driver, who produced the truck being so commanded by the police. The witnesses who were also frightened and it was around 2.00 to 3.00 a.m. in wee hours, villagers in particular they were robbed of gold ornaments, assaulted, could not be expected to give correct truck number with all precision. It has 3 Criminal Application No.997/2011 been so explained in the supplementary statements by the witnesses. This is the matter of appreciation at the time of trial. 6. Doubt expressed about the panch witnesses from Dharur and not from Osmanabad is illusory. Considering the nature of accusations, the investigator could not collect the panchas from the village of the accused and consequently, no illegality on his part to collect the panchas from Dharur or some of the occupants in the jeep, who were robbed. 7. Release of the other accused/ applicants will not be applicable for release of the present applicant as there was recovery at the instance of the accused/applicant. Application lacks merits, dismissed. Observations are prima facie. K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE fmp/cri186.11