1 Cri.A.No.1451-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1451 OF 2010 Ashokkumar Satairam Jaiswal .. Applicant Vs The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr Nitin Pradhan i/b Ms S.D.Khot, for the applicant. Mr H.J.Dedhia, APP, for the respondent. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATE : 30/09/2010 PC: 1. This is the second application for bail. The earlier application of the present applicant was rejected vide order dated 17.7.2009. Relevant observation in paragraph 3 of the order reads thus : “I have perused the statement of the complainant -Sharu Jafar Shaikh and the eye-witness – Abdul Salim Abdul Azij. Both these witnesses have stated in detail as to how the incident occurred and how the present applicant actively participated in committing the murder of the deceased. The deceased was stoned to death. The post mortem report shows that his face was completely smashed. He sustained five fractures. The manner in which the deceased was killed and considering the nature of allegations against the applicant, in my opinion, this is not a fit T 2 Cri.A.No.1451-10 case to enlarge the applicant on bail.” 2. I have heard Mr Pradhan,learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State. Mr Pradhan pressed this application on parity contending that after the application of the present applicant was rejected on 17.7.2009 this court has released one Ravindra alias Don on bail. According to Mr Pradhan, the role attributed to Revindra @ Don and the role of the present applicant is identical. I have perused the statements of the eye-witnesses and the complainant so also the order releasing Ravindra alias Don dated 12.11.2009 on bail. Insofar as the role of the present applicant is concerned, it is clear that the present applicant allegedly told co-accused-Nandu to hit stone on the head of the deceased, which Nandu did by throwing a big stone on the head of the deceased, as a result thereof he died on the spot. Insofar as the role of Ravindra alias Don is concerned, the only allegation against him is that he kept a leg on the west of the deceased. In my opinion, the applicant is not entitled for bail on parity and hence, the application is rejected. (D. B. Bhosale, J.) 3 Cri.A.No.1451-10