( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 681 of 2008 Surendra RajBhadur Pathak ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent. Mr K. S. Patil Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs M. H. Mhatre, A.P.P. for the State-Respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. CORAM : V.C. DAGA, J. DATED : 19.06.2008. DATED : 19.06.2008. DATED : 19.06.2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused and the learned APP for the State. 2. Perused application and the material available on record. 3. The applicant is seeking bail in ( 2 ) connection with C.R. No. I-370 of 2007 registered with Manickpur Police Station, Taluka Vasai, District Thane for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C. 4. The only material sought to be relied upon by the prosecution to defeat this application is recovery of mobile phone which was allegedly lying near the dead body of the victim. That is how, the prosecution is trying to connect the present applicant with the offence registered. The said mobile phone was without any SIM card. Admittedly, no IMEI number of mobile phone is mentioned in the seizure memo. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has used the mobile phone which he was normally using till the date of his arrest i.e. 4.12.2007. 6. The record produced by the prosecution shows that the mobile phone number which was used by the present applicant was 9860025257, carrying IMEI No. 356453010379090. The applicant has made a categorical statement that he never used ( 3 ) the alleged mobile which alleged to have been seized by the police allegedly lying near the dead body of the victim. 7. On being asked the learned A.P.P. is unable to point out what was the E.M.E.I. number of the mobile phone which was actually seized. If the mobile number IMEI No. 356453010379090 was seized on 4.12.2007, then, naturally, this was a mobile phone which was used by the applicant right upto 4.12.2007, which is clear from the documents produced by the prosecution. 8. At any rate, today, there is no prima facie; material to connect the present applicant with the offence alleged so as to deny bail. 9. In view of the above matter and taking into consideration the fact that the investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed, there is remote possibilility of tampering with the record of the mobile company which is already collected by the I.O. There is hardly any possibility of threat to the prosecution witnesses at the instance of the ( 4 ) applicant. 10. Taking into account overall view of the matter, on one hand, and gravity of the offence on the other, the applicant would be entitled for bail. a] The applicant, arrested in connection with C.R. No.370 of 2007 registered with Manickpur Police Station, Tal.Vasai, District Thane be enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two local sureties to make up the said amount. b] The applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station, once in a month i.e. on every first Monday between 10.00 to 12.00 noon till filing of the charge sheet. c] The order of bail will be given effect only after the applicant ( 5 ) furnishes to the Investigating Officer the details about his place of residence and address where he proposes to stay after he is enlarged on bail. The applicant will not change his residential address thereafter till the conclusion of trial without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer. d]The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement or threat or pressurise any prosecution witnesses and shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence. e]The applicant shall co-operate with the Trial Court for disposal of the case. It is needless to mention that breach of any of the conditions by the applicant shall result in cancellation of bail. ( 6 ) f] Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as finding or expression on merits of the case at the time of trial. 11. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (V.C. DAGA,J.) (V.C. DAGA,J.) (V.C. DAGA,J.)