1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 744 of 2010 IN Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 2007 [Manoj Narayan Sable Vs. State of Mah.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. V.M. Deshpande, Adv., for the applicant. Mr. D.B. Patel, APP for respondent. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 16th December, 2010. 1. This is a second application for bail. Earlier application for bail was rejected by this Court by a speaking order passed on 9th April, 2007. While the earlier application was rejected on merit, this Court had recorded liberty to apply for bail in the event appeal is not heard. 2. Admittedly, appeal is not ready for hearing and the applicant has filed this application for bail. 3. The grounds agitated in support of 2 application for bail can be summarized as follows:- [a] The weapon of assault alleged against applicant is an axe. [b] It cannot be said that use and recovery of axe is proved. [c] Alleged injury due to use of axe is caused on parietal region, while cause of death is otherwise. [d] Witnesses are not concurrent on the point of presence of applicant. [e] Admittedly, twelve accused were tried for offences under Sections 302, 147, 149 etc., of Indian Penal Code. [f] In all five accused have been convicted. 4. Heard learned Adv. Mr. V.M. Deshpande for the applicant and learned APP Mr. D.B. Patel for the respondent. 5. Considering totality of evidence, involvement of accused being a member of an unlawful assembly with a common intention is duly proved. 6. We see no reason to arrive at any conclusion other than the one reached by this 3 Court at the time of rejection of application for bail by order dated 9th April, 2007. 7. Barely the ground that appeal is not being heard, as it is not ready, by itself does not constitute a ground for grant of bail, particularly when involvement of the accused as a member of an unlawful assembly is proved. Individual role, therefore, will be a matter to be considered when the appeal is heard. 8. The application is, therefore, rejected. Judge Judge |Hedau|