[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.2576 OF 2008 Santosh Vinayak Lambe ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.M.B.Zanwar Advocate for Applicant Ms.A.T.Jhaveri APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : AUGUST 4, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 4, 2008 DATE : AUGUST 4, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in CR No.319 of 2007 of Kothrud Police Station, Pune. The said case is mainly under Section 302 of IPC. 3. It is the prosecution case that the applicant along with other accused assaulted Santosh. Role attributed to the applicant is that he assaulted Santosh with iron rod. Santosh sustained 20 injuries in the incident. The injuries are consistent with the assault by iron rod. [-2-] 4. The learned advocate for the applicant stated that co-accused Kishor Londhe has been granted bail and the case of the applicant is similar to that of Kishor Londhe. It is seen that the complainant who is an eye witness has not named Kishor Londhe in the FIR. Kishor Londhe came to be granted bail mainly on the ground that he was not named in the FIR. In any event, role attributed to Kishor Londhe is that he assaulted with sword. On perusal of the post mortem notes, it is seen that all the injuries on the deceased were not possible by sword, hence, there is no question of parity. Looking to the role attributed to the applicant and the injuries on the deceased, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant bail. 5. Application is rejected. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]