jpc ba694-11.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 694 OF 2011 Shankar Manohar Kamble ... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Abhay Ostwal i/by Mr. Pavan S. Patil for the applicant Mr. J. P. Kharge, APP for the State CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 20th July, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Ostwal, the learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. Kharge, the learned APP for the State. 2. I have gone through the first information report. There exists a strong prima facie case against the applicant. The prayer for bail has been canvassed on two grounds. The first is that one of the co-accused Mr. Ravindra Rane has been released on bail by this Court (Cri. Bail Application No.1004 of 2011, decided on 13th July, 2011). I, however, find that the nature of evidence that would be adduced against the said accused is totally different from the nature of evidence that would be adduced against the present applicant during the trial. The applicant appears to have been caught on the spot by the police and his name is jpc ba694-11.sxw 2 reflected in the F.I.R. itself. The other ground is that the applicant is in custody since July, 2010 and that the trial has not yet commenced. 3. It is true that the trial has been somewhat delayed. But, considering the nature of the offence and the nature of the evidence that is likely to be adduced against the applicant during the trial, I am not inclined to release him on bail. Instead, it would be appropriate to direct the trial to be expeditiously held. 4. The application is rejected. 5. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and endeavour to complete it within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. 6. Liberty to apply afresh for bail, should the trial be not over by that time. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)