AJN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.349 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.196 OF 2010 Sachin Charandas Bunkar ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Khan Abdul Wahab for the applicant. Mr. S.S. Pednekar, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM: MRS. RANJANA DESAI & MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATED : 6TH APRIL, 2010. P.C.:- 1. The applicant is original accused 3. By impugned judgment and order dated 5/6/2009, the applicant has been convicted, inter alia, for offences punishable under Section 120-B, Section 364-A, Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment. The applicant’s appeal has been admitted. This is his application for bail. AJN 2 2. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant. He pointed out that the co-accused of the applicant have been released on bail by this court and the applicant’s case stands on par with that of the co-accused, who have been released on bail. Hence, learned counsel submitted that the applicant may be released on bail. 3. Learned A.P.P. pointed out that the applicant met the other two co-accused on 17/11/2003 i.e. just a day before the day on which Raj was abducted. He pointed out that the evidence discloses that the applicant told the other accused that since the child was not to be seen they would carry out their activities on the next day. Learned A.P.P. pointed out that one telephone pocket diary was found in possession of the applicant and on the last page of the said diary, the name of Agarwal, the father of Raj and two telephone numbers are mentioned. Besides, the name of co-accused Aslambhai is also mentioned. He submitted that, therefore, the involvement of the AJN 3 applicant is made out. 4. It is not possible for us to accept the submissions of learned A.P.P. There can be no doubt that there is parity between the applicant’s case and the case of the other accused, who have been released on bail. It may be pointed out that the report of the DNA test states that the skeleton sent for test was not the offspring of PW-1 and PW-2 i.e. the father and the mother of boy Raj. Important link in the chain of circumstances is therefore snapped. The circumstances pointed out by learned A.P.P. cannot place the applicant's case on a different footing. 5. In the circumstances, the applicant – Sachin Charandas Bunkar is ordered to be released in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with solvent surety in the like amount. While on bail, the applicant shall attend R.A.K. Marg Police Station on every alternate Monday between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon for a period of one year and thereafter on first Monday of every month. He shall maintain his pocket AJN 4 diary in respect of his attendance. The applicant shall not commit any offence while on bail. Criminal application is disposed of. [MRS. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [MRS. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.]