FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1890 OF 2009 ___________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _______________________|___________________________________ This application is filed by the applicant for regular bail in connection with Crime No.80 of 2008 registered at Police Station Kallam for offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 326, 323 and 504 of I.P.C. 2 It is not in dispute that the earlier application was filed by the present applicant after filing of charge-sheet and the same has been rejected by this Court. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that this application is filed in the change in circumstances. At the time of hearing the first application by this Court, medical certificate of complainant Satish was not available and in absence of that, this Court had rejected the application for regular bail. He invited my attention to the medical certificate of complainant Satish and submitted that only two simple injuries were sustained by Satish and the only allegation against the applicant is that he assaulted Satish. He invited my attention to the compilation and submitted that there is no allegation that applicant inflicted injury to any other injured persons. The learned Counsel submitted that at the most, case of the applicant would fall under Section 326 I.P.C. He further submitted that at this stage, since it is the contention of the learned A.P.P. that most of the witnesses have been examined, there is no question of tampering with the witnesses or evidence. He would, therefore, submit that this Court may allow the application for regular bail. 3 The learned A.P.P. Submitted that there is no change in circumstances. The earlier order was passed after filing of charge-sheet. He invited my attention to the letter of the A.P.P., Osmanabad addressed to the Asstt. Govt. Pleader stating therein that most of the witnesses have been examined and only one prosecution witness has remained to be examined and the trial is likely to be over within one month from today. 4 After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, at this stage, without entering into the merits of the matter, it would not be appropriate to allow application when trial has substantially progressed. Therefore, though the learned Counsel for the applicant is right in contending that the injuries on the complainant Satish are simple in nature, since the trial Court is dealing with the evidence, in my considered view, no interference is called for. 5 Therefore, the application is rejected. It is made clear that this application is rejected only on the ground that trial has substantially progressed and it is likely to over within one month. (S.S. SHINDE, J). 12.10.2009. PLK/#