-1- bpk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 657 OF 2008 AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1089 OF 2008 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 296 OF 2008 Smt. Umesh Vasudeo Gupta : Applicant v/s State of Maharashtra : Respondent Ms. Kranti S.S. Anand i/b Shailesh Kumar Pandey Advocate for Applicant Mr. S.R. Shinde Advocate for Respondent Coram : A.R. Joshi,J. Date : 6.4.2009 P.C. . Heard rival submissions on both the pending bail applications respectively preferred by accused no. 3 and 2. In all four accused persons were convicted by judgment and order of Sessions Court dt. 16.3.2008 and since then present applicants, accused no.2 and 3 are in jail custody. Earlier another bail application was preferred by all the four accused, however during the arguments bail application for present accused no. 2 and 3 was not pressed and as such this court earlier granted bail to women accused i.e. accused no. 1 and 4. Thereafter present two separate applications came to be filed. Earlier bail application no. 1089/08 of accused no.2 came to be dismissed for default and was subsequently restored to the file by order of this court dt. 1.12.2008. -2- . During the arguments it is submitted on behalf of applicants that bail application for accused no.2 is not pressed as the entire criminal appeal bearing no. 296/2008 is ready for hearing and as such the arguments will be advanced on merits of the judgment of conviction. So far as bail application of accused no. 3 i.e.application no. 657 of 2008 is concerned it is submitted that only the substantive evidence of PW2, sister of the deceased is held as against said accused no. 3 when admittedly said accused no. 3 was not residing in the family of accused no.2 and his deceased wife. It is submitted that the conviction of present accused no. 3 appears to be only on the basis of statement of PW2. . As against above arguments learned APP submitted that all the accused were convicted for the offence punishable u/s 498-A r/w. section 34 of the IPC and they are sentenced to suffer RI for 2 years, for the offence punishable u/s 306 r/w section 34 of the IPC they are sentenced to suffer RI for 5 years and for the offence punishable u/s 304-B r/w section 34 of the IPC and they are sentenced to suffer RI for 7 years. As such considering the evidence also that of PW2 Trial Court had convicted the present accused no. -3- 3 also and maximum imprisonment of 7 years u/s 304-B is given. It is further submitted that criminal appeal no. 296/2008 in which judgment and order of conviction is impugned is ready for final hearing and as such there is nothing to allow the present bail application on the grounds mentioned. . Considering the rival submissions and considering that entire criminal appeal no. 296/2008 can be disposed of after hearing rival submissions and considering the grounds mentioned in the bail application in the opinion of this court this is not the case in which the applicants can be released on bail during the pendency of said criminal appeal which is to be taken in immediate proximity. Hence the order: ORDER . Criminal bail applications no. 1089/2008 and 657/2008 stands dismissed. . Upon request on behalf of accused, criminal appeal no. 296/2008 is adjourned in next week. (A.R. Joshi, J)