1 appa.294.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.294 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.818 OF 2008 Anwar Musa Sayyed & Ors. ...Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ...... Mr.Ashok Mundargi, Sr.Counsel with Ms.Vishranti Navale for Applicants. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, A.P.P. for Respondent. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND U.D.SALVI, JJ. DATED:- SEPTEMBER 17, 2010. P.C. 1. This Application is for bail to release original accused Nos.1, 3 and 7. Counsel appearing for the Applicants, in all fairness, submits that insofar as accused No.1 is concerned, he may not press this Application, as there is consistent evidence about his overt act and involvement in the commission of offence. 2. In other words, we are called upon to consider prayer for bail only of accused Nos.3 and 7. The principal argument of the said Applicants is that PW 1, PW 2 or PW 4 have not named the said accused in the statements 2 appa.294.10.sxw recorded before the Police. That fact is established from the cross- examination of the said witnesses, where they have accepted that position. The fact remains that PW 2 has mentioned the involvement of accused Nos. 3 and 7 specifically in Section 164 statement. The fact that PW 1 and PW 4 have not mentioned the name of accused Nos.3 and 7 in the Police Statement, does not take the matter any further. There are strong circumstances on record which have been adverted to by the Trial Court indicating the involvement of accused Nos.3 and 7 including the recovery of gupti. For the purpose of bail, we think that the view taken by the lower Court is a possible view. Hence, this Application should fail in respect of all the three accused namely accused Nos.1, 3 and 7. 3. At the same time, we observe that the Office shall process the matter under category `convicts in jail’ to be listed as per its turn if the Appeal is ready in all respects. (U.D.SALVI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)