1 cri-appa-417-11 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 417 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 189 OF 2011 Sunil @ Shendi Rajaram Mandavkar .. Applicant (Org.Accd.No.4) Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. Sudeep Pasbola for applicant. Mrs. A.S. Pai, APP for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & A. M. THIPSAY, JJ. APRIL 05, 2011. P.C. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant. Mrs. Pai, the learned APP, appears for the State of Maharashtra. As per the prosecution, the incident had occured in the aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition. In the night on 10/1/1993 while 2 cri-appa-417-11 the complainant along with her parents was in the house at about 10 p.m. some persons started pelting stones on her house and thereafter someone knocked the door. All of them were frightened and when they opened the door, 3-4 persons had entered the house and those persons were known to the complainant as they were residents of the same locality. They were armed and her father was dragged out of the house. At that stage, her mother intervened and tried to resist the assailants and requested them not to beat her husband. Both of them were assaulted by the assailants and in bleeding injuries they were taken to the hospital. Her father and mother were removed to the hospital for treatment, but her mother died prior to her admission in the hospital and in the noon on that day her father also died. The house was demolished. The accused came to be tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 read with Section 34 and Sections 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 149 and 427 of IPC. The trial court convicted accused nos. 1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 120-B and 427 read with Section 34 as well as under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. This application for bail has been filed by accused no.4. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses and relied upon the 3 cri-appa-417-11 evidence of P.W. 2 – Salima Gani Shaikh and PW 3 – Mohammed Gani Shaikh as the eye witnesses. We have perused the copies of oral depositions of both these witnesses as placed on record by the learned counsel for the applicant and noted that in the substantive evidence before the court both these witnesses have identified the applicant as one of the assailants. We have considered the arguments advanced before us by Mr. Pasbola, the learned counsel for the applicant, in support of his plea for being released on bail and on our prima facie considerations of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and the reasoning set out in support of the order of conviction, we are satisfied that there is no case made out to suspend the order of sentence and release the applicant on bail under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the application is rejected. (A. M. THIPSAY, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)