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. 267 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 267 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 267 OF 2009 Mr.Chandrakant Shankar Sathe ...Applicant (Orig.Accused No.4) vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Ms.Revati Mohite-Dere for the Applicant. Mrs.M.H. Mhatre, APP for the State. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 2, 2009 DATED : FEBRUARY 2, 2009 DATED : FEBRUARY 2, 2009 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard Counsel for the applicant and APP for the State. 2. The applicant has been arrested in connection with an offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302 of the IPC and under Sections 37(1)(3) read with 135 of the Bombay Police Act. 3. Prosecution case is that the applicant alongwith others assaulted the deceased with the lethal weapons. The applicant had assaulted with a stick. Eight accused encircled the deceased and the present applicant alongwith others assaulted him as a result of which he - 2 - succumbed to injuries. 4. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the only role attributed to the present applicant is that he had assaulted the deceased on his head with the stick. She invited my attention to the post mortem notes which indicate that no fracture was caused on the head of the deceased. It was, therefore, submitted that cause of death could not be attributed to the role played by the present applicant, viz. assault on the deceased with a stick. 5. This submission cannot be accepted. Since the case of the prosecution is that the applicant and others assaulted the deceased, post mortem notes indicate that number of incised injuries have been found on the person of the deceased. The applicant had assaulted the deceased with the stick. The other accused encircled the deceased in order to ensure that he did not escape from the clutches of the assaulting accused. Taking into consideration this material on record, it cannot be said that the applicant did not share the common - 3 - intention of the other accused who had assaulted with swords and other lethal weapons. The other eight accused have been released on bail, obviously because they were only trying to prevent the deceased from running away. Therefore, the applicant cannot claim bail on the ground of parity. 6. The application of bail is rejected. 7. The trial, however, is expedited. Liberty is granted to the applicant to apply for bail if the trial is not over within a reasonable period of time. The trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made by this Court while rejecting the application of the present applicant for bail since the findings are not based on evidence but of prima facie nature and on the material which is on record. The trial court shall decide the case on merits and in accordance with law. (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)