-:1:- IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 251 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 251 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 251 OF 2008 IN IN IN CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 211 OF 2008 APPEAL NO. 211 OF 2008 APPEAL NO. 211 OF 2008 Vijay Yellapa Kanale & Ors. ... Applicants. V/s. The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent. Mr. Kedar G. Prabhu for Applicants. Mrs. V.R. Bhosale, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & K.U. K.U. K.U. CHANDIWAL,JJ. CHANDIWAL,JJ. CHANDIWAL,JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 28TH APRIL, 2008. : 28TH APRIL, 2008. : 28TH APRIL, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . This is an application for bail by the accused who have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 for causing the death of one Nirmala. 2. During the course of the trial, the accused were not on bail. According to the learned Counsel, the reason why the bail was granted at the trial stage cannot be supported in law. We need not consider that aspect as of now as there is now, a speaking judgment of the Court. 3. The learned Counsel contends that the dying declaration is not a dying declaration as such no reliance can be placed on the same. We have -:2:- considered the dying declaration and the judgment of the Court. In our opinion, considering the dying declaration and the fact that there are injuries also on Accused No.1, this would not be a fit case to grant bail. Hence, the application for bail is rejected. (F.I. (F.I. (F.I. REBELLO, J.) REBELLO, J.) REBELLO, J.) (K.U. (K.U. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.) CHANDIWAL,J.)