{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.949 OF 2010 Satish s/o Manikrao Hake APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr. G.P.Shinde, Advocate for the applicant Mr. K.S.Patil, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 10th June 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection of CR No.69/2010 registered with Dharmabad police station, Dist-Nanded for an offence punishable u/s 302, 307 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code. It is informed that the applicant is arrested on 11th September 2009 and after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed in the month of December 2009 and the trial is also committed to the Court of Sessions. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation. 3. It appears that the offence is registered on 30th August 2009 on the complaint of one Datta Hake, brother of the present applicant. It is alleged that the complainant came to know about {2} the alleged incident of applicant committing murder of his own mother in his own house, from the son of the applicant only. The age of the son of the applicant Mahesh is 10 years, whose statement is also recorded during the course of investigation. Perusal of the statement of Mahesh indicates that in the night between 29th and 30th April when he was sleeping along with his grandmother (deceased), the present applicant committed her murder. The PM notes indicate that the death is caused due to the head injury i.e. multipul fracture. Perusal of the injuries sustained by the deceased and recorded in the PM report, shows the force of the attack on the head of the deceased and hence the deceased died instantaneously. Apart from it, as the incident is witnessed by Mahesh, the applicant has also assaulted him with knife. The act alleged against the applicant is brutal one and hence he does not deserve any leniency. As there is direct evidence against the applicant and if he is released on bail there is danger to the life of the lone eye witness the applicant does not deserve liberty. 4. In the result, the application, which is sans merits, stands rejected. It is however, clarified that the above observations are prima facie observations based on the papers of investigation. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln949-10