1 APPA 766.11.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 766 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 191 OF 2011 Lalusingh @ Lalu Bihari @ Chhota Bihari Singh (Suresh Chandru Singh). ... Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent. Mr. Nitin Sejpal and Ms. Pooja Bhojne for the Applicant. Ms. S.V. Gajare, APP for the State. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & K.U. CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATED : 1st AUGUST 2011. P.C. :- Heard. 2. This application is filed for bail pending the appeal. The Applicant is a life convict. 3. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the incident took place on 1st May 2009. According to prosecution, the motive is the strained relations between the deceased and the brother of the Appellant. The learned Counsel submitted that though prosecution examined eye witnesses PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3, the evidence is not reliable. None of the eye 2 APPA 766.11.sxw witnesses have identified the Appellant. There is a discrepancy as to whether a pistol was used by accused. At the first instance, the Police failed to recover any article from the Appellant but later on, it was shown that at the instance of the Applicant, a weapon (pistol) and clothes were recovered. 4. The learned APP opposed the Bail Application. He submitted that the deceased was fired at and the recoveries were made at the instance of the Applicant. 5. We have perused the record. We find that the prosecution examined three eye witnesses to the incident. There is recovery of weapon used by the Applicant. 6. Considering the nature of offence and the material on record, no case is made out for grant of bail to the Applicant. 7. The Application is rejected. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.) (NARESH H. PATIL,J.)