1appln-1660-10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 1660/2010 Duryodhan Rohidas Dupargude vs. the State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr Shashi Kumar Panday i/by Subhash Hulyalkar for the applicant. Mr K.V.Saste, A.P.P.for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 22nd JUNE, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions for some time on this application for regular bail. 2. The applicant, allegedly the main accused, is arrested in C.R. No. 248/2008 registered with Haveli Police station, District Pune for the offence under sections 302, 201 of I.P.C. on 2.6.2008 along with other four co-accused. Allegations against him are that he killed the victim by means of axe. The motive for such killing was that his daughter, one of the eye-witnesses, had love affair with the deceased. Allegedly an axe was recovered at the instance of the present applicant on 5.6.2008. Prior to that on 3.6.2008 blood stained clothes of the present applicant were also recovered at his instance. Statement of his daughter 2appln-1660-10 was also recorded on 3.6.2008 in which according to her had given extra judicial confession as to doing away with the deceased as a revenge. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned A.P.P. that there are five witnesses and they state role of the present applicant as the main accused using axe for assaulting the deceased. Considering prima facie material and considering that the investigation is over and the matter is posted for charge/recording of evidence, it would not be in the fitness of situation to release the present applicant on bail during the pendency of the trial. However, the trial in the matter can be expeditiously be taken up by the concerned learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune who is seized of the matter. Hence, the following order. ORDER: (a) Criminal Application No.1660/2010 is hereby rejected. (b) Learned Sessions Judge, seized of the present matter shall make all endeavour to frame charge, if it is not framed earlier, and to complete the trial as expeditiously as possible and preferably within nine months in accordance with law from the date of receipt of writ of this order. (c) Learned Additional Sessions Judge shall not be influenced by any observations made by this Court while rejecting bail to the present applicant. (d) The application is disposed of. (A.R.JOSHI,J)