1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1258 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 720 OF 2007. Anilkumar @ Lapetu Ramshakal Sharma. ... Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra... .... Respondent. None present for the Applicant. Mrs. A. S. Pai, Addl.P.P. for the Respondent. CORAM: BILAL NAZKI and S. A. BOBDE, JJ. DATED : 4TH MARCH, 2008. P. C.: This is an application for seeking bail pending the appeal. The applicant – accused has been convicted for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to life imprisonment. The appeal filed by the applicant against the conviction has already been admitted by this Court. During the trial, the applicant was in custody. The respondent State has filed their counter affidavit stating that there is 2 apprehension that if the accused is granted bail, he may jump the bail and may not be available to police again. The past record, according to the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, shows that he was involved in 17 crimes relating to the offences relating to property and body including offences in the nature of housebreaking and theft. It is also stated that in the year 2004 the applicant was externed from Mumbai but inspite of that he entered the area of Mumbai and then committed offence under Sections 302, 307, 506-II and 34 of the Indian Penal Code along with another accused, namely, Shabir Shaikh. He was also booked under Sections 4 and 27 of the Indian Arms Act and Section 142 of the Bombay Police Act. He was detained for a period of one year in terms of the Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers, Drug- offenders and Dangerous Persons Act, 1981. We have also seen that in the case, in which he has been convicted, the Sessions Judge has relied upon the evidence of two witnesses, who were injured eyewitnesses. 2. In this view of the matter, we do not think that there is a case made out for grant of bail. Hence the application for bail is rejected. 3. Needless to say, the observations made in this order are purely for the question of considering whether the applicant should be bailed out on bail or not and the appeal should be considered on its own merits without 3 being influenced of any observations made herein. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (S. A. BOBDE, J.)