1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JUTISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4326 OF 2009 Balaram Rama Gondhali ...Applicant. V/s State of Maharashtra .... Respondent. Mr. S.V. Marwadi i/b Sunita Sharma for the applicant. Mrs. M.R. Tidake, APP for the State. ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4327 OF 2009 Rajaram Dattatray Gondhali .... Applicant. V/s. State of Maharashtra ..... Respondent. Mr. S.V. Marwadi i/b Vinayak Kotti for the applicant. Mrs. M.R. Tidake, APP for the State. 2 CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 13TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. Applicants alongwith other accused have been arrested for the offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 324, 325, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, under sections 4 and 27 of the Arms Act and under sections 37(1) and 135 of the Bombay Police Act which is registered by Sheel Daighar Police Station, Thane, vide C.R. No.I-171/2008 . In all there are about 31 accused. 2. It is the prosecution case that there was an altercation between one Gurunath Gondhali and some of the accused on the date of the incident at about 4 O’clock. Gurunath and his friends were playing cricket at village Bamarli. Some of the accused went there and insisted that they should be allowed to play on the said ground. According to prosecution, Gurunath told them that since they were playing first, they should be allowed to play and, thereafter, the accused could play on that ground. The accused, thereafter, left in huff and threatened Gurunath and others who were playing cricket on that ground and after about 20 minutes they came there with about 30/31 3 persons in a group and assaulted Gurunath with sword, knife and sickle and other lethal weapons and also assaulted other persons who were playing cricket on the said ground. As a result, the said Gurunath sustained about 17 injuries on his person and died on the spot and others received simple injuries. 3. Mr. Marwadi, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf applicants, submitted that names of the applicants are not mentioned in the FIR. There was recovery of stick from Balaram Gondhali but there were no blood stains on the said stick. No recovery has been made from Rajaram Gondhali. No specific role has been attributed to the applicants. The learned Counsel submitted that, subsequently, in the statements of eye witnesses, their names have been added. He submitted that Dilip Pawse and Shankunath Bhoir were released on bail by this Court since no specific role was attributed to them. He, therefore, submitted that applicants also deserves to be released on bail on the ground of parity. 4. There is some substance in the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of applicants. Names of the applicants have not been mentioned in the FIR and no specific role has been attributed to them. Though a stick has 4 been recovered from Balaram Gondhali, there are no blood stains on the said stick. None of the witnesses have stated that these two applicants have assaulted Gurunath who was killed in the incident. The injury certificate of other injured witnesses clearly reveals that they had sustained simple injuries. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, applicants deserve to be released on bail. 6 Applicants be released on bail in C.R. No.I-171 of 2008 registered by the Sheel Daighar Police Station, in the sum of Rs 5000/- each with one or two sureties each in the like amount. Applicants shall report to the Sheel Daighar Police Station once in a month. Applicants shall not threaten or intimidate the prosecution witnesses. 7. Both the applications are accordingly disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)