1 CR.APL NO.331/2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 22. APPLN/331/2011 SHAIKH MATIN S/O BASHIR [Criminal] V/S STATE OF MAHARASHTRA -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr.H.D.Deshmukh, Adv., for the petitioner. Mr.N.B.Patil, APP for State. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE: 7-2-2011 1. Heard. In the typed copy of the FIR, at least at two places, name initially appearing as Matin has been typed otherwise which create an impression that there was no name of the accused/applicant Matin in the FIR. This has been so argued by Mr. Deshmukh. Learned A.P.P. points from the FIR that reference to other persons is either deliberate or by mistake but it could influence the Court that their may not be reference to Matin. He corrects the record by producing copy. The FIR, indeed, implicates Matin. 2. At this stage of the matter, without knocking to the Counsel further, such practice is simply condemned. Counsel will take care in 2 CR.APL NO.331/2011 future. 3. It is not that in the FIR the accused/applicant is not named. In the identification parade, the mother of the deceased Babu has pointed, the accused/applicant was one of the accused persons, who nabbed, dragged and assaulted the victim in the wee hours. That apart, another eye witness Kailas Ganpat Chavan has implicated the accused/applicant. Even if the accused is in custody from 25th August, 2010, however, that will not be providing any parameter to release him on bail taking benefit of principles of parity, considering release of other accused. Standard of commission of act by the accused is more grave than role played by other accused. Consequently, application rejected. The observations are prima facie in nature. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... AGP/331-01crapl