1 A IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.460 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.398 OF 2009 Michael Egal @ Gorge Anthony C. .. Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents Ms.Anjali Patil with Mr.R.S.Bidkar for the applicant. Mr.U.V.Nikam, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED : JULY 6th , 2009. P.C. Heard rival submissions for some time. Also perused the notes of evidence and the Judgment by which appellant/applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 326 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R/I.for five years and fine of Rs.3000/- i/d. to suffer further imprisonment for three months. 2. Reportedly, applicant accused attended J.J.Marg Police Station on 12th March, 2008 with a request that he may be arrested by 2 the Police. Applicant accused being foreign national of Nigerian nationality wanted to escape from some anti social elements and as such wanted to take shelter in the police station and shouted for his arrest. In fact, it was a strange request coming from the accused after entering the police station and as such there was an attempt on the part of the police officers including the complainant police constable, then present at the police station to calm him down. It appears that there was no proper communication as applicant accused being foreign national could not express himself properly. Apparently, there was some altercations and in a fate of anger applicant accused bit left ear of the complainant police constable. From the date of such incident i.e. 12th March, 2008 applicant is in jail. After trial he was convicted as mentioned above. However, was acquitted for the offences punishable under section 333 and 353 of Indian Penal Code mentioning that the complainant was not proved to be on official duty and was not doing any official work. In the opinion of this court, this aspect can be dealt at length in deciding the appeal. So far as grant of the present application for bail is concerned, what is significant is whether the present applicant/appellant can be available during the pendency of the appeal and at the time of final hearing of the appeal. On this aspect, learned A.P.P. for the State submitted that reportedly applicant had no passport and as such he has no any known avocation or livelihood and as such may not be available, if released on bail on any amount of 3 surety. 3. On this aspect, it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that applicant had take the passport and he is ready to surrender the same, however, still considering the matter at hand and considering the scope of availability of the present applicant, in the opinion of this Court, here it is a case in which the applicant cannot be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal and hence present bail application is dismissed. 4. Under these circumstances, the hearing of the appeal is expedited. 5. With these directions, the bail application stands disposed of. (A.R. JOSHI, J.)