1 Cri.Appln.No.2301/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2301 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 303 OF 2011 Panchyahattar Mishrya Kale ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri H.F. Pawar, Advocate for applicant Shri B.J. Sonawane, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 24th August, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. Perused the application and record. 2. This is an application for grant of bail in the Criminal Appeal preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 22.2.2011, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad in Sessions Case No.94/2010. The applicant/ accused has been convicted under Section 394 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal 2 Cri.Appln.No.2301/2011 Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to suffer S.I. for three months. 3. A crime under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code came to be registered at Bhoom Police Station against the unknown persons on the basis of complaint dated 7.12.2009 lodged by P.W.1 Santoshi Parmeshwar Ingole. The involvement of the present accused was brought to light by juvenile co-accused Mayur. P.W.1 Santoshi revealed in her complaint that, at around 5.00 p.m. on 7.12.2009, she left her village Walwad for village Ulup on the motorcycle of one Sagar, her sister’s son, and was carrying Rs.1,00,000/- in black colour bag; and on way, some 1 ½ Kms. at village Chumbali, they were accosted by two unknown persons to be looted of their belongings namely, the bag containing Rs. 1,00,000/-, her and her children’s clothings, golden Mangalsutra, gold ganthan, Nokia Mobile, silver chain at the point of knife and stick. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant/ accused that, except the disclosure made by the co-accused to the police, there is nothing worthy to believe the prosecution case 3 Cri.Appln.No.2301/2011 of robbery at the hands of the applicant/ accused. He submitted that, test identification parade was not held and there has been no recovery or discovery of any offending article from the applicant/ accused to suggest his involvement in the crime. The learned A.P.P. does not dispute these facts except saying that, the Court had believed the testimony of P.W.1 Santoshi on the premise that she had enough opportunity to see the face of the applicant/ accused and, therefore, the involvement of the applicant/ accused who had history of 20 criminal cases warranted credence. In the considered opinion of this Court, the case against the applicant/ accused appears to be based on shaky edifice. Deserves grant of conditional bail. Hence the order. O R D E R 5. The criminal application is allowed. The applicant/ accused shall be released on P.R. bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) with one or more sureties in the like amount on the condition that the applicant/ accused shall attend Bhoom Police Station on 15th of every month between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. during the pendency of this appeal. 4 Cri.Appln.No.2301/2011 The applicant/ accused shall not leave Osmanabad district without prior permission of this Court. Parties to act on authenticated copy of this order. ( U.D. SALVI, J. ) fmp/cri2301.11