1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application (APPA) No. 189/2011 in Criminal Appeal No. 617/2010 Kailash Ramkrushna Yesansure .vs. The State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Kharangna, Tah. Arvi, Distt. Wardha. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. Mr. R.N.Khare, Advocate for applicant. Mrs. Nandita Tripati, APP for respondent CORAM : MRS. V.K.TAHILRAMANI & M.L.TAHALIYANI, JJ DATE : 27.04.2011 Heard Mr. Khare, learned counsel for applicant and Mrs. Nandita Tripati, learned APP for respondent. 2. The applicant has been convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing death of Chandrabhan. The applicant is now seeking bail. 3. There is no eye witness to the incident and the prosecution case is dependent only on circumstantial evidence. The circumstances relied upon are of recovery of sticks and shirt at the instance of the applicant. As far as the recovery of sticks is concerned, complainant Shailesh (P.W.1) has identified wrong sticks 2` i.e. he has deposed that sticks articles 12 and 13 were there and not the sticks articles 4 and 5. Pancha witness P.W.2 Baburao identified those sticks to be articles 2,4 and 18 and not the stick article no.5. Thus, it is noticed that there is a variance as to the numbers of sticks, so also there is material discrepancy in relation to the identification of the sticks. So far as the discovery of the shirt at the instance of the applicant is concerned, it is noticed that panch witness P.W.5 Swapnil Lakde has not supported the prosecution case. The other witnesses on the point of seizure could not be traced. 4. In addition to the above facts, it is noticed that it is an admitted fact that the applicant was on bail during the trial. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has not misused the bail granted to him. This statement has not been controverted by the prosecution. Looking to all these facts, we are inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order: a) The sentence of imprisonment imposed on the applicant is suspended. The applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with surety in the like amount. b) Before being released on bail, the concerned 3` Police Station shall be informed the address where he will stay during the period that he is on bail. c) The applicant shall attend the Police Station, Kharangna, Tah. Arvi, Dist. Wardha once in a month till disposal of the appeal. 5. Application disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE patle