MP 1 BA1538_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1538 OF 2011 Mohd. Saif Mohiddin ... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Y.S.Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : J. H. BHATIA, J. DATE : 14TH DECEMBER 2011 P. C. : The applicant seeks to be released on bail in crime No.28 of 2007 registered with Kasara Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 394, 328, 201 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that, on 07.03.2007, four persons hired one Tavera car number MH-04 CD-867, owned and driven by deceased Nandkumar Gavli, for the purpose of going to Shirdi. According to prosecution, on the way to Shirdi, passengers including the present applicant administered some stupefying drug to the said Nandkumar Gavli and killed him. His dead body was thrown in the valley. The said four persons took away the said Tavera car as well as some other property of Nandkumar Gavli. The Tavera car was found by U.P. Police on 10.03.2007. At that time, present applicant was driving the said car and another accused Badri Badruddin Aalam was sitting by his side. From the pocket of Badri Aalam, credit cards of deceased Nandkumar Gavli were found. As the present applicant and said Badri Aalam could not satisfactorily explained how they were in possession of that Tavera car, U.P. Police arrested them and seized the car. As the registration certificate of the car revealed that it was registered in Thane District, U.P. Police contacted the police at Bhiwandi where Nandkumar Gavli used to reside. Thereafter, the said car was transferred in this case, which was MP 2 BA1538_11 already registered after the dead body of Nandkumar Gavli was found. 3. The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence including evidence about last seen together, recovery of the vehicle from the present applicant and recovery of some credit cards of the deceased from another accused, who was also in the car. Admittedly, there is no eyewitness. The learned Counsel for the applicant contends that remaining three accused persons including Badri Badruddin Aalam have been released on bail and the case against the present applicant cannot be distinguished from the case against the other accused persons. He also contends that thought the present applicant is in custody since March 2007 and the charge-sheet was filed long back as also the case was committed to the Sessions Court, no progress has been made in the trial and not even the charge is framed. Thus, the present applicant is in jail for last about four years and nine months without trial or any progress in the trial. The learned Counsel contends that, in these circumstances, bail may be granted to him. 4. It is unfortunate that the trial has not commenced even though the accused is in jail for last four years and nine months. On perusal of the record, it is difficult to distinguish the case against the present applicant from the case against the other accused, and particularly against accused Badri Badruddin Aalam, who has been granted bail. 5. Therefore, the applicant be released on his executing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two local solvent sureties to make up the amount with condition that he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall also attend Kasara Police Station, on first Sunday of every month till end of the trial. (J. H. BHATIA, J)