1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4138 OF 2008 Devendra @ Bitya Bhausaheb Padale .... Applicant. V/s State of Maharashtra and anr. ..... Respondents. Mr. Vivek Salunke for the applicant. Mrs. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 24 th February, 2009 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. Applicant has been arrested in connection with the offence punishable under sections 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 read with section 25 of the Arms Act. It is alleged that the applicant alongwith others had assaulted Vijay Bhimrao Suryawanshi with the weapons like chopper, scythe etc. on 16/01/2008 at about 8.30 p.m. There are eye witnesses who have stated that the applicant had used chopper and had given a blow with the chopper on the head of the deceased. The blood- stained chopper has been recovered at the instance of the applicant. 2 3. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that there was some delay in recording the statement of the alleged eye witnesses. Delay in recording the statement by itself cannot be a ground for discarding the said statement in its totality and this aspect will have to be considered at the time of final hearing of the trial. He further submitted that two other accused have been granted bail by the Sessions Court. This submission also cannot be accepted because the accused who have been released on bail have not been attributed the same role by the eye witnesses as they have attributed to the present applicant. Applicant, therefore, cannot claim bail on the ground of parity. 4. Taking into consideration the role attributed to the present applicant, in my view, no case is made out for grant of bail. Application for bail is, therefore, rejected. (V.M. KANADE, J.)