.{1}. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.64 OF 2008 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1176 OF 2007 Taijuddin Balu Patel. ..Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. .. Mr.Y.A.Sakhare, Adv. i/b. M/s. YKS Legal, for the Applicant. Smt.P.H.Kantharia, APP, for the State. .. CORAM : S.B.MHASE AND CORAM : S.B.MHASE AND CORAM : S.B.MHASE AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATED : JANUARY 29, 2008. DATED : JANUARY 29, 2008. DATED : JANUARY 29, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Heard both sides. 2. The applicant is an accused from the Sessions Case No.100 of 2006 decided by the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Kolhapur. He was tried for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and was set at liberty. Judgment in Sessions Case No.100 of 2006 .{2}. was challenged by the State Government by filing appeal against acquittal being Criminal Appeal No.1176 of 2007 along with Criminal Application No.2151 of 2007 for granting leave to file appeal against the acquittal of the applicant. This Court granted leave to appeal and admitted the said appeal and directed further action under Section 390 Cr.P.C.. Therefore, the applicant was arrested by the police and produced before the Sessions Judge. The applicant therefore preferred an application before the Sessions Judge for grant of bail. The said bail application was rejected on a ground that the appeal against the acquittal of the applicant has been admitted by this Court and also considering the nature of offence on the fact that during the trial the applicant was not on bail. Therefore, the applicant approached this Court. 3. We cannot forget that there is an order of acquittal in favour of the applicant-accused. The action under Section 390 Cr.P.C. has been directed by this Court after admission of appeal only to secure the presence of appellant during pendency of appeal. It was inappropriate to reject the bail to a .{3}. accused person who has been found to be not guilty by the Sessions Judge. The learned APP also fairly conceded for grant of bail. Therefore, applicant be released on bail of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand Only) with a like surety, till disposal of the appeal. 4. Application is accordingly disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [S.B.MHASE,J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [S.B.MHASE,J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [S.B.MHASE,J.]