1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY : AURANGABAD BENCH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 651 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra - - Applicant versus 1. Deelip Ashroba Sodgir, age 30 years, occ. agril., r/o. Dongargaon, taluka Gangakhed, dist. Parbhani. 2. Sambhaji Vishwanath Sodgir, age 28 years, occ. agril., R/o. as above. 3. Mahadev Vishwanath Sodgir, age 25 years, occ. and resident of as above.- - - Respondents Shri K. G. Patil, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the applicant - State. Shri P. V. Suryawanshi, Advocate holding for Shri S. R. Barlinge, Advocate for respondents Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : N. D. DESHPANDE, J. Dated : 7th August 2009 PER COURT: 1. Heard learned A.P.P. Shri Patil for the State and Shri Suryawanshi for respondent accused. 2. The present application is made for 2 cancellation of bail of three respondents named above who are accused in a criminal case registered under sections 302, 147, 143, 148, 149 of I. P. Code amongst others for being members of unlawful assembly and rioting with a common object to commit murder and did commit murder of Maroti who was brutally assaulted by them with lathis i.e. sticks and spade. Maroti died of head injuries which are mostly from the spade and, therefore, other co-accused namely; Shankar Trimbak Sodgir and Tukaram Trimbak Sodgir were not granted bail. Bail application of these respondents was considered mainly on the ground that they were attributed role of assailants carrying and using sticks i.e. lathis and immediately impugned bail order was passed. The present application came to be filed for cancellation of bail, mainly on the ground that offence is serious and punishable for lifer or death in a rioting. Now it is informed that the charge sheet has been filed. 3 3. The main grievance of the applicant State is that these respondents are also conjointly responsible for the death of Maroti and they are equally punishable under section 149 of the I.P.Code which is constructive liability jointly with those who actually used spade and caused death. Except this, there is no other complaint such as misuse of bail, liberty while on bail for tampering the witnesses or otherwise. 4. After going through the record and after hearing both the sides, it is seen that learned trial Court had scanned the material and stated the role of individual member of the assembly from whatever material available at the relevant time and on merit granted bail. The bail granted to the respondents need no interference. Criminal application stands rejected and accordingly disposed of. ( N.D.DESHPANDE, J.) pnk/cria65109