1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3594 /2009 [ Shriwan Bansilal Deogade vs. State of Maharashtra) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. P P Kotwal, Adv.for applicant Mr S.B.Ahirkar,APP for Respondent .......... CORAM : A.P.BHANGALE, J. DATED : JANUARY 4, 2010. Heard. 2. By the instant application, the applicant prays for grant of bail in respect of Crime No. 159/2009 registered against the applicant and others, for offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the charge-sheet is already filed in this case and; as against the applicant-Shrawan Deogade, the prosecution has proposed to rely upon the evidence of solitary eye witness, by name, Jairam Shivdayal Sharma. Learned Advocate further made a reference to the photostat copy of the statement purportedly recorded u/s 161 of the Cr.P.C. inviting my attention to the contents, in order to argue that the witness concerned was himself in an inebriated condition and no active role has been attributed to the present applicant-Shrawan Deogade, in the alleged incident of murder. It is also 2 argued that the witness concerned is admittedly an illiterate witness, inasmuch as his right hand thumb impression was obtained below the statement. Furthermore the witness was not the first informant in this case. 3. Learned APP stoutly opposed the application on the ground that offence is of serious nature and as such, prayed for rejection of the same. 4. Considering the fact that the charge-sheet is already filed and the prosecution has proposed to rely upon the evidence of solitary eye witness who himself was in a drunken condition, bail needs to be granted. Furthermore, assuming that his statement to be true, at this stage, it appears that there was reference to previous enmity, abuses etc; but no active role has been attributed to the present applicant in the alleged incident of murder; as the said witness admittedly ran away to inform about the incident of quarrel to Altaf, brother of Ashpaque ( deceased). Under these circumstances and in view of the fact that that chances of conviction upon such evidence appears to be remote, at this stage, the applicant can be released upon bail, subject to certain conditions, so as to secure his presence at the time of the trial. Hence the order : The applicant be released in respect of Crime No. 159/2009 registered at Kalamna Dist. Nagpur for offence punishable u/s 302 read with section 34 IPC 3 upon executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with two or more sureties in the equal amount, provided further that he shall attend on each date of hearing in the trial Court ;shall not commit any offence while on bail and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. Application is disposed of. JUDGE sahare