1 appln.776.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Application No. 776 of 2010 IN Criminal Appeal No. 854 of 2008 Harish Ramjeevan Gupta ....Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra ....Respondent Mr. Ashok G. Toraskar-advocate appointed for the applicant. Dr. F.R. Shaikh-APP for the State. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND P.D.KODE, JJ. DATED:- OCTOBER 20, 2010. P.C. Considering the fact that there are three eye witnesses who have spoken about the incident in question about the involvement of the Applicant in the commission of offence which evidence has been believed by the trial Court, We find no reason to depart from the said opinion. In view of that, question of granting bail does not arise. The argument of the Applicant that the other two witnesses have not seen the incident and cannot be labeled as eye witness to depose about the overt act committed by the Applicant does not commend to us. 2 appln.776.10 In our opinion, the view taken by the trial Court and evidence of the three witnesses done by the trial Court is possible view. 2. In the circumstances, this Application is rejected. However, the Appeal shall be processed, to be heard under caption ‘convicts in jail’ as per its turn. 3. Court expresses word of gratitude for the able assistance given by the Learned amicus curiae. 4. Copy of this order be forwarded to the Applicant who is in jail. (P.D.KODE, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)