(1) CRI. APPLN. 3854.2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3854 OF 2009 Krishannath Gahininath Kokate, Age : 48 years, Occu.: Agri., R/o : Tugaon, Tq. Omerga, Dist.: Osmanabad .. Applicant VERSUS State of Maharashtra (Copy served on the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Bench at Aurangabad) .. Respondent Mr. Joydeep Chatterjee, Advocate for the applicant Smt. V.A. More, APP for the respondent-State CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 12TH JANUARY, 2010 PER COURT:- 1] The applicant's Advocate is allowed to amend the application. The applicant-accused has approached this Court once again with his plea of bail. Earlier, he had filed application for bail which I disposed of on 25.6.2009. At that time, his Advocate sought withdrawal of the application and I, in turn directed the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Omerga, Dist. Osmanabad to dispose of the Sessions Case arising from the crime in question as (2) CRI. APPLN. 3854.2009 far as possible within six months. I also gave liberty to the applicant to apply for bail in case the case is not disposed of. 2] It is now clear that due to the lethargy on the part of the prosecution agency, the case has not been committed even till today to the Court of Sessions. I perused the explanation sent by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lohara, Dist. Osmanabad with whom the case is pending at present. He said that due to the failure of the Police to produce the muddemal articles, he was unable to commit the case to the Court of Sessions. The learned Magistrate, appears to be in real difficulty. Indeed, the case is certainly not adjourned at the request of the applicant or the other co-accused. 3] The present application is mainly based on a specific reason as to why the applicant should be released on bail. It is stated that applicant's wife is not well and requires immediate medical attention. It is also contended that she is probably suffering from suspected cancer of ovaries. 4] Since I did not examine the merits of the case earlier, I think it is time to examine the merits of the case and to decide as to whether the applicant deserves bail. The case against the (3) CRI. APPLN. 3854.2009 applicant is that he and other two co-accused women companions together assaulted the deceased with fist and kicks while they were sitting and having drinks and dinner at a beer-bar. It is an admitted fact that during the assault, no weapon was used. However, it is seen clearly that the victim died due to the injury caused to his external genitals. It is not on record as to who is the author of the injury on his genital. In view of these circumstances and in view of the fact that the Sessions case is yet not committed, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 5] The applicant is released on bail of Rs.20,000/- (Rs.Twenty Thousand) with one surety in the like amount. Criminal Application stands disposed of. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp