1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 1888 of 2010 Gajanan Garibaji Bhalekar ..VERSUS.. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., P.S., Pulgaon, Tah. Deoli, Dist. Wardha. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. A.S.Manohar, Advocate for the applicant Mr. S.M.Bhagde, A.P.P. for the Respondent/State. CORAM : Prasanna B. Varale, J. DATED : 16 th Decem ber , 2010 . Heard. This is an application for grant of regular bail in Crime No. 138/2010 registered with Police Station, Pulgaon, Tah. Deoli, Dist. Wardha for the offence punishable under SEctions 302 and 201 of I.P.C. Mr. Manohar, learned Advocate for the applicant by inviting my attention to the report lodged against the applicant submits that only on suspicion , the applicant is roped in the present crime. He further submits that there is no material with the investigating agency to connect the applicant with the crime and the material available is only the statement of witnesses, which were recorded at a belated stage. Learned Advocate for the applicant further submits that even considering the statements of witnesses recorded by the investigating agency, it is difficult to believe those witnesses for the reason that the witnesses have stated that they helped the applicant to lift the dead body of the victim. According to him, it is difficult to believe that these witnesses while lifting the dead body did not notice whether that person is alive or not and did not notice the injuries caused to the 2 so called dead body, whereas it is the case of the prosecution that the deceased was seriously injured. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that in view of such a weak evidence, the prosecution will not be able to prove its case and ultimately keeping the applicant behind the bars is not less than a pre-trail conviction. Per contra, Mr. Khan, learned APP has strongly opposed the application by filing the reply. Learned APP has submitted that apart from the statements of the witnesses, there is strong material on record to connect the applicant with the crime, mainly in the nature of recovery of broken glass at the instance of the applicant. In the medical evidence, the Medical Officer has opined that the injuries caused to the deceased can be caused by broken glass. The spot panchanama reveals that there were blood stains on the tiles as well as on the walls of the rooms of the applicant’s residence. Learned APP further submits that though the recovery of the blood stained clothes was not from the house of the applicant, those were found in the well and they are forwarded to the Chemical Analyzer for analysis and the report is awaited. Learned APP further submits that this strong material is sufficient to connect the applicant with the crime and at this stage, if the applicant is enlarged on bail, there is an apprehension that the applicant may hamper the investigation. He, therefore, prayed for rejection of the application. Considering the material available against the applicant and perusal of the record, I find that there is considerable merit in the submissions of learned APP. Hence, in my opinion, this is not a fit case in which bail can be granted to the applicant. In the result, the application is rejected and disposed of as such. JUDGE Diwale