(1) CRI.APP. 3523.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3523 OF 2010 Ramesh S/o Chagan Bhosle Age : 29 years, Occu.: Agriculture, R/o Mukindpur, Tq. Newasa, Dist. Ahmednagar .. APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Copy to be served on G.P. High Court Bench at Aurangabad .. RESPONDENT ... Mrs. Sadhana S. Jadhav, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. B.J. Sonawane, APP for the respondent-State ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 15TH OCTOBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. The Application is under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The applicant came to be arrested in connection with crime no. I-276 of 2009 registered at Rahuri Police Station for the offences punishable under section 395 of the I.P.C. 3. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant and learned APP. (2) CRI.APP. 3523.2010 4. Perused the investigation papers. The learned Advocate for the applicant submits that co- accused by name Rajendra Chavan is released on bail by the Sessions Judge in Criminal Misc. Application no. 315 of 2010. Copy of that order is placed on record. The incident occurred on 11.10.2009 at about 1.15 am. The FIR purports to show that 5-6 persons barged in the house of the informant at the odd hours, threatened his sister at the point of knife and took away her gold ornaments. They also snatched away the ornaments of his mother and confined his parents in the toilet. Thereafter the dacoits opened the cupboard in the bedroom and took away the ornaments. 5. The applicant was arrested likewise other persons and co-accused Rajendra Chavan in connection with the crime. The Bail Application came to be rejected. Learned APP points out that one air-gun and mobile phone were recovered from the applicant. He would point that chargesheet has been filed. He also submits that the applicant is involved in similar offences. (3) CRI.APP. 3523.2010 6. So far as recovery of the air-gun is concerned, the FIR does not show that any of the dacoit was holding air-gun likewise which has been recovered form the applicant. The FIR does not make any reference to the mobile phone which was recovered from the applicant. It is noteworthy that there is no recovery of gold ornaments at the instance of the applicant. The test identification parade did not show that he was identified by the witnesses including the complainant. 7. Considering these aspects, and in view of the fact that co-accused Rajendra Chavan is released by Court of Sessions, on basis of parity, the applicant deserves grant of liberty. 8. In the result, the Application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety bond to the satisfaction of the Court of Sessions and on condition that he shall not make any attempt to contact the prosecution witness or tamper the (4) CRI.APP. 3523.2010 prosecution evidence in any manner and further that he shall report his presence to the P.S.O. of Rahuri Police Station on each Tuesday and Saturday between 7.00 pm. to 9.00 pm. during the pendency of the trial. Sd/- [V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp