1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION N O.1686/2008. Omkar Katre s/o Atmaram Katre, aged about 24 years, Occu: Agriculturist, R/o Gowaritola (Charbhata), Tq.Deori, Distt.Gondia (Accused in jail) ..vs.. State of Maharashtra, Thriough P.S.O. P.S.Deoli,Gondia. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, office Memoranda of Coram Court's or Judge's appearances, Court's orders or directions order and Registrar's order. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= CORAM: C.L.PANGARKAR,J. DATE : 4th July, 2008. 1. Heard Shri S.H.Quazi, Advocate for the applicant/accused and Shri A.S.Sonare, Additional Government Pleader, for the State. 2. This is an application for grant of bail. The complainant runs a Kirana shop. On the day of the incident, he went to bed. After some time few people came to his house, knocked the door. Wife of the complainant opened the door. The persons who entered the house were carrying Revolver. At the point of gun they took away Rs.41000/- from the 2 house of the complainant. The report of the incident was lodged after a week. Police thereafter arrested three persons. A charge sheet has been filed. The case has been committed to the court of Sessions. 3. The applicant/accused had moved an application for bail to this court. This court has rejected the application dated 22/10/2007 holding that there was enough of evidence available against the accused/applicant. 4. This second application has been filed for release of the accused on the ground that other two accused are already released by this court as well as Sessions court. 5. Shri Kazi, Advocate for the applicant/ accused, submits that since accused Tejram has been released by the court on bail, that should be taken into consideration and on the ground of parity this accused should also be released on bail. He submits that this is a change in the circumstance which makes the accused/applicant entitled to bail. In this regard, it may be mentioned that even before Tejram's application was granted, this court had rejected the bail application of the present applicant/accused on the ground that there was an evidence of 3 identification parade available as well as seizure of the property stolen. Although Tejram may have been released, it may be mentioned that he was released after the application of the present accused was rejected. The applicant/accused is certainly not entitled to be released on the ground of parity, since this court has already found that the evidence is available against the present accused/applicant. 6. Shri Kazi, learned counsel, submits that the accused has been in jail for a very long period. Considering this aspect, it is directed that the Sessions Judge, before whom the Sessions trial is pending, shall hear this matter as early as possible and decide the same. JUDGE. chute