1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.57 OF 2009 Mukesh Umakant Tiwari .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr.A.P.Mundargi, Sr.Counsel i/b Mr.Tushar Sonawane for the applicant. Mrs.S.D.Shinde A.P.P. for the State. Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 13TH JULY, 2009 P.C. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in C.R.No.13 of 2008 of Dindhori police station, District Nashik. The crime has been registered against the applicant and four others for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 302, 325, 143, 147, 148, 149 of IPC. 3. Mr.Mundargi, learned senior counsel for the applicant, at the outset, invited my attention to the statements of the eye witnesses - Sunil Dashrath Shinde, Pravin Pandarinath Shinde and Sachin Subhash Shinde and submitted that the circumstances against which the applicant fired two shots from his gun, it is clear that he did it in self defence. I have perused the statements of the eye witnesses. It appears that initially there was an incident of accident in which one of the accused persons was assaulted and detained by 2 the mob from the village – Walkhed/Pade. When this incident was reported to the company in which the said accused was working, the other accused, including the present applicant, rushed to the scene of offence. The applicant was armed with gun. It is true that initially they tried to pacify the mob and tried to take their colleague away from the mob. But, the mob started chasing them. It is alleged that the applicant fired two shots at the mob. One bullet hit the deceased, who died due to multiple pillet injuries. Ms.Shinde, learned A.P.P., submitted that the applicant had no reason to carry his gun to the place of incident. She further submitted that if at all the applicant intended to scare the mob, he could have fired in the air and not at the mob. She submitted that all the pillet injuries are on the vital part of the body. Having considered overall facts and circumstances of the case I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. The trial is expedited. If the trial does not commence within six months from the date of receipt of this order it is open for the applicant to apply for bail afresh. While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. Application is disposed of. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)