1 Cri.Appln. No.657 of 2011 hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 657 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2010 Hanmant Sopan Ingale and anr. ... Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. U.R. Angadsurve for the applicants. Mr. P.S. Hingorani, A.P.P. for State. CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL & K.U. CHANDIWAL,JJ. DATED : JULY 12, 2011 P.C. Heard. The applicants were convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 302 along with other co-accused persons. The application is filed for bail. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that some of the co- accused are released on bail by this court. The counsel further submits that the role attributed to the applicant is that they assaulted the 2 Cri.Appln. No.657 of 2011 deceased on legs and hands. Even according to medical evidence the applicant did not inflict deadly blows on the deceased. Considering all these facts and circumstances and the evidence on record, the counsel prays for releasing the applicant on bail. The learned A.P.P. opposed the application. We have perused the material placed on record, depositions of the witnesses, and judgment passed by the court. The charge as framed against the accused persons is for the offence punishable under section 302 read with 149 of I.P.C. Prima facie, we are convinced that the eye witness P.W. 8 has narrated in detail role played by the applicants. According to prosecution, there was an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of the same, the deceased was assaulted. At this stage, it would not be permissible to scan the evidence to determine as to whether the applicant should be released on bail on account of minor assault inflicted on the deceased. Considering the gravity of the offence and the manner in which assault was made, we are not convinced to release the applicant on bail. Hence, application for bail is rejected. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.) (NARESH H. PATIL,J.)