[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.2863 OF 2008 Hanumant Sopan Ingale and Anr. ..Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.Anilkumar K. Patil Advocate for Applicants Mr.Rajesh More APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : AUGUST 30, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 30, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 30, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking bail in CR No.53 of 2008 of Akluj Police Station. The said case is mainly under Section 302 of IPC. 3. The complainant Somanth Kale who is an eye witness, has stated that the present applicants along with others assaulted his son in law Arjun Ingale. The complainant has stated that first co-accused Shahaji Laxman Ingale assaulted Arjun on [-2-] the head with sword. Thereafter, one Shahaji and Shivaji stabbed Arjun with swords. Thereafter both the applicants assaulted Arjun on the legs with koyata. The post mortem notes show the incised wounds on the legs. The deceased sustained ten injuries in the incident. 4. The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that co-accused Shahaji Laxman Ingale and co-accused Ankush Laxman Ingale have been released on bail and the case of the applicants is similar to that of Shahaji Laxman Ingale and Ankush Laxman Ingale and hence, the applicants may be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is seen that bail was granted to the co-accused by the learned Sessions Judge. This Court is not bound by any order passed by the Sessions Court. Looking to the manner of assault, weapons used and the nature of injuries, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant bail, hence, application is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]