Appa 544.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.544/2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.955/2009 Sudhir Waman Pawar APPLICANT VS. The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.N.R.Bubna for applicant Mr.D.P.Adsule,APP for State CORAM: NARESH H.PATIL & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE- 27th JUNE,2011. P.C. . Heard. 2 The applicant filed appeal against the order of conviction and sentence of life imprisonment. Alongwith applicant Sudhir, Co-accused Kedar too filed appeal. By order dated 16/12/2009 the Division Bench of this Court (J.N.Patel & A.A.Sayed,JJ ) released Kedar on bail. Kedar was convicted and sentenced for an offence punishable u/s 326 of the Indian Penal Code and was acquitted for offences punishable under sections 302,307,506 and 201 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Appa 544.11 2 3 The prosecution alleged that deceased Rajpal was assaulted by present applicant Sudhir. According to the Medical Officer, P.W.10 Dr.Dange, the deceased suffered two injuries. (1) Stab wound at right side ofneck having size 2.5 inch x 1.5 inch deep to cut right carotid artery. (2) Incised wound left side of chest 4.5 inch x 2 inch in size. Both the injuries were antimortem. The incident took place on 26/10/1999. There are eye witnesses to the incident. 4 Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that deceased Rajpal was on the spot alongwith his three brothers. There was exchange of some hot words between them, applicant and the co-accused. In the scuffle the deceased was said to have suffered injuries. The applicant is innocent. The eye witnesses are interested and their evidence is not reliable. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant was on bail during the trial. He was arrested on 25/8/2009 after the pronouncement of judgment. He would abide by the conditions,if any, imposed by the Court. Appa 544.11 3 5 Learned A.P.P. submitted that there is strong evidence against the applicant. Medical evidence corroborates the versions of the eye witnesses. The applicant has used dangerous weapon and gave blow on vital part of the body of the deceased. Therefore, he prayed for rejection of bail. 6 For the purpose of consideration of bail application, we have perused the evidence placed on record, depositions of relevant witnesses including eye witnesses and medical evidence. There is strong prima facie case made out against the applicant. Considering the manner of assault and the weapon used, we do not find that the applicant deserves to be released on bail. The application stands rejected. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (NARESH H.PATIL,J.)