[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.1042 OF 2008 Amit Kanta Chorge ..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.K.S.Patil Advocate for Applicant Mr.S.S.Pednekar APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JULY 10, 2008 DATE : JULY 10, 2008 DATE : JULY 10, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in CR No.256 of 2006 of Haveli Police Station, Pune. The said case is mainly under Section 307 of IPC. 3. The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that case is only under Section 307 of IPC and the applicant has been in custody for one year and seven months, hence, applicant may be released on bail. In support of his contention, he has placed decision of the Supreme Court in the [-2-] case of Bhausaheb Nagu Dhavare Vs. State of Mah. Bhausaheb Nagu Dhavare Vs. State of Mah. Bhausaheb Nagu Dhavare Vs. State of Mah. reported in 2001(3) Crimes 410 (SC) 2001(3) Crimes 410 (SC) 2001(3) Crimes 410 (SC), wherein bail came to be granted to the applicant as he was in jail for eight months. 4. In the present case, it is seen that the applicant caused injury with sword. Sixteen injuries were found on the body of the injured person. Moreover, the learned APP states that next week i.e. on 15.7.2008 the trial is to start. Looking to all these facts, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant bail at this stage. 5. Application is rejected and is disposed of accordingly. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]