1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1111 OF 2010 Mr. Shankarappa @ Shankar B. Handrale. ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. Mr. P.R.Arjunwadkar for the Applicant. Smt.A.A. Mane, APP. For the State. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 27th April, 2010 PC : 1 This is an application for grant of regular bail. The applicant is shown as an accused No.2 in CR No.59/2009 registered by Valasang Police Station for the alleged offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the I.P.C. The deceased is one Bhimashankar and his son Laxman is the eye witness. Laxman has named the present applicant and the role assigned to him is that he threw a stone on the head of the deceased. Role of throwing of stone is also assigned to another accused in this case. Some 2 of the other accused persons have assaulted the deceased with sharp instruments. The cause of injury is a crush injury on the head. One of the eye witness talks about the present applicant throwing a stone on a specific part of the body. It will not possible to hold that there is no material against the present applicant. The Advocate for the applicant argued that only one stone was found at the spot and the second stone said to have been used by co accused i. e. Accused No.3 was not found at the spot. Be that as it may, once an eye witness specifies the role of the present applicant i. e. throwing of a stone on the head of the deceased and that injury is found to be fatal, non seizure of the second stone would not be of much importance. In the circumstances, application is rejected. It is however, made clear that the observations made in this order will not be used at the time of trial. Application is disposed off. ( R.S. MOHITE, J.)