1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 761 OF 2009 Viththal Ambanna Mali ..... Applicant. V/s State of Maharashtra ...... Respondent. Mr V.V. Purwant for the applicant. Mr. J.D. Mane for the original complainant. Mr. Rajesh More, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 31st March, 2009 P.C:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant and the learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. 2. Applicant has been arrested in connection with the offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the present applicant is that he had given a blow with an axe on the head of the deceased. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that, according to the 2 complainant, the blow was given by the applicant as well as by Irappa Mali on the head of the deceased. He submits that the postmortem report indicates that there was only one injury on the head and there was a fracture of the skull. It is submitted that, therefore, this would not have been possible if the applicant would have given the blow on the head of the accused since there was only one injury on the head. He submitted that one other witness has stated that the accused Irappa had assaulted his father with an axe and that no role is attributed to the present applicant. It is, therefore, submitted that there is a discrepancy in the statement of the complainant and Santosh Mali. Counsel for the applicant invited my attention to the injuries on the person of the deceased shown in the postmortem notes. 4. The submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant cannot be accepted. The complainant has clearly stated that this applicant as well as Irappa had give blow on the head of the deceased. It is possible that both these accused had given the blow on the same spot and as a result of the blow the skull of the deceased was fractured and he died due to shock. Santosh Mali in his statement has stated that both, the present applicant as well as Irappa assaulted the deceased. This being the position, there is clear material on record which shows involvement of the present applicant in the offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Hence, no case is made out for grant of bail. Application for bail filed 3 by Irrappa has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 16/02/2009 in Criminal Application No.701 of 2009. 5. Application for bail is dismissed. Trial is expedited. It is clarified that the Trial Court shall not be influenced by any observations made by this Court while dismissing this application for bail as the said observations are prima facie in nature. The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law. (V.M. KANADE, J.)