IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.813 OF 2009 Yusuf Mohammad Hafis Shaikh ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent --- Shri Mahendra R. Jhakde for Applicant Shri D.P. Adsule, APP for State ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED 25TH FEBRUARY, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and the Learned APP for the State. 2. The Applicant has been arrested on 31.3.2007 in connection with an offence punishable under section 302 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was registered vide C.R. No. I-31 of 2007 at Vithalwadi Police Station against the Applicant and the other accused. 3. The prosecution case is that the Applicant and other accused had assaulted the deceased with knives and they were arrested by the police who were petrolling the streets. The other accused has been released on bail since he was juvenile at the time when the offence was committed. The Applicant was 20 years of age when the said offence was committed. 4. The further prosecution case is that the Applicant's father was allegedly murdered by the deceased and he had also attempted to commit murder of his maternal uncle and he used to make off seen telephone calls to his sister and threaten her that he would kidnap her and, therefore, the present Applicant and the other accused had assaulted him with knives. There was no prior antecedent of the present Applicant. There is no doubt that there is material on record, which shows involvement of the present Applicant and the offence is punishable either by imposing death sentence or imprisonment of life. However, there is no substance in the submission made by the Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant. At the highest it could be said that the Applicant had exceeded his right of private defence, particularly because of the past history of the deceased, who had killed the father of the Applicant and attempted to murder his maternal uncle and, therefore, the Applicant used his right of private defence by committing the said offence to save himself. Though, at this stage, it is difficult to say whether the Applicant would succeed in the said case since at the stage of granting bail, it is possible that the offence under section 302 may be harsh by the Trial Court. The Applicant is in jail since last two years, continued detention of the Applicant, in my view, is not necessary. Taking into consideration that the Applicant is a young boy and under the circumstances of which the incident had taken place, the Applicant deserves to be released on bail. 5. The Applicant be released on bail in a sum of Rs.5,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. The Applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Vithalwadi Police Station during pendency of the trial for a period of six months. He shall give his new residential address to the Superintendent of Jail before he is released on bail and report to the nearest police station from the new residence twice in a month and after expiry of six months he shall report to the Vithalvadi Police Station once in a month till pendency of the trial. 6. Application is disposed of. V.M. KANADE J.