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 SIDE CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3558 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3558 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3558 OF 2008 Kiran Baban Patil ...Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.S.V. Kotwal for the Applicant. . Mr.H.J. Dediya for the State. CORAM: D.B.Bhosale,J. CORAM: D.B.Bhosale,J. CORAM: D.B.Bhosale,J. DATED: 15.10.2008 DATED: 15.10.2008 DATED: 15.10.2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Mr.Kotwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.Dediya, learned APP for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in C.R. No.25 of 2008 of Umbraj Police Station, District Satara. The said crime has been registered against the applicant and two others for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 302, 394 read with section 34 of IPC. 3. This is a case of circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has relied upon the following circumstances / material to connect the applicant with the alleged offence : last seen together, motive, recovery of the stolen articles, the fact that the applicant was working as cleaner with the deceased - Driver and that he was aware that 19 kgs. Silver was in the truck at the relevant time and the statements of the witnesses in support of the prosecution’s case. I have Perused the statements of the witnesses namely telephone booth operator, rickshaw driver and watchman. They all had seen the accused just before and after the alleged incident. The accused was also seen last in the company of the deceased. All these circumstances are sufficient to connect the applicant with the offence. 4. In the circumstances, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. The application is rejected. (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.)