IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1044 OF 2009 Sajid Hamid Shaikh ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent --- Shri Rahul Kate i/b. Gautam T. Kamble for Applicant Shri , APP for State ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED 13TH MARCH, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and the Learned APP for the State. 2. The Applicant has been arrested in connection with an offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 332, 427, 149 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3, 25 (1), 27 of the Arms Act. 3. It is alleged that the Applicant and others had assaulted the deceased with sword and other weapons. The deceased succumbed to the injuries and died. The cause of death as given in the postmortem notes is hemorrhagic shock due to multiple incised wounds over head and multiple fracture skull with intra cranial hemorrhage. The role attributed to the present Applicant is that he had given blow with sword on the neck of the deceased. 4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant seeks bail on the ground of parity. He submitted that the role attributed to the present Applicant is the similar role which has been attributed to the other accused, who have been released on bail. He submitted that one other accused has been released on bail by this Court. 5. In my view, the witnesses have clearly attributed a definite role to the present Applicant. Taking into consideration the statements of the witnesses, in my view, the Applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. The Applicant also cannot be released on bail on the ground of parity. So far as Vijay Bakade is concerned, this Court in Criminal Application No.2870 of 2008 was pleased to release this Applicant only on the ground that the role attributed to him was that he had fired a shot, but in the postmortem notes does not show any injury caused by a bullet fire. So far as the Stanlee John is concerned , the role attributed to him was that he was having a sword in his hand when he assaulted the deceased. 6. In my view, the reasoning given by the Sessions Court is incorrect, therefore, the Applicant is not entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. 7. Application for bail is, therefore, rejected and disposed of. V.M. KANADE J.