1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Criminal Application No.1364 of 2008 [S. U. Ambhore Vs. State of Mah.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. N.B. Kalwaghe, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.A. Thakre, APP for respondent. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 10th June,2008. 1. This is a case of an offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The earlier application for bail was withdrawn by the applicant with liberty to file a fresh one if trial does not conclude within two months. 3. Heard. 4. Prosecution is trying to connect the accused with the offence on the basis of recovery of a golden chain, which is alleged to have been recovered on 29th April, 2007. 2 5. The application for bail is opposed. The affidavit filed by the respondent reveals the fact of recovery of chain. The prosecution is not able to pinpoint any other circumstance thereby connecting the accused with the offence. 6. Admittedly, the victim, who suffered injury on 24th April, 2007, did not regain consciousness, and died on 12th June, 2007. There are no eye-witnesses. There is no story of 'last seen.' Even the golden chain, which is recovered, is not connected with the victim by evidence, which should have prima facie worth of credibility. 7. For identification of golden chain, learned Advocate for the applicant placed reliance on reported Judgment of this Court in the case of Raja Sawla Shinde etc. etc. Vs. State of Mah. [1998 (2) B. Cr. C. 165], to urge that the golden chain was not duly identified. 8. This Court is of the view that the sole piece of evidence sought to be relied by the prosecution is not strong enough, at this stage, to connect the accused with the crime in question. 9. Prima facie, the accused has made out a case for grant of bail. 3 10. This Court even called for the report to ascertain as to whether the trial can proceed expeditiously. It is seen that it is due to failure of the prosecution to co-operate, the trial is being delayed. 11. In these premises, the applicant is entitled for bail under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code. 12. This Court, therefore, allows the application and directs release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a Personal Bond and a Solvent Surety in a sum of Rs.15,000-00 [rupees fifteen thousand only]. Hamdast allowed. Judge |Hedau|