1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 392 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 202 OF 2007 Pappu Khan Sherali Khan .. Applicant v/s. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. Prakash Shetty with Mr. Jayesh A. Vithlani for the applicant. Ms.M.H. Mhatre, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. CORAM : J. H. BHATIA, J. DATED : 9TH APRIL, 2007 P.C. Heard Mr. Prakash Shetty, the learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. M.H. Mhatre, the learned A.P.P. Perused the judgment and record of the trial court. 2. The applicant was convicted for the offence under section 392 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs.200/-. He was also convicted for the offence under section 457 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs.100/-. The substantive sentence of imprisonment on both counts is to run concurrently. The applicant has preferred an appeal against the conviction and sentence. Appeal is admitted. By this application, the applicant seeks to be released on bail pending the trial. 2 3. The record reveals that in all five persons robbed the complainant Iqbal Ahmed, who runs a hotel, of the amount of Rs.63,500/- in a plastic bag, a mobile handset and cannon camera. The incident occurred on 2.3.2005 at about 01.00 a.m. when the complainant was closing his hotel. While leaving the spot, the culprit tied the hands of the complainant. After departure of the culprits, the said complainant was rescued by some other person and thereafter, police was informed. Immediately, police started checking of the vehicles proceeding from the side of Peru Lane, Pathanwadi area. At about 3.15 p.m. the taxies were checked at Kumbharwada Junction. As soon as the taxi stopped, one person ran away and four persons, including the present applicant, were caught. From the present applicant, an amount of Rs.12,200/- and one knife were recovered. With the other three accused also an amount of Rs.10,000/- each were found. During the trial, the complainant and his servant identified the present applicant as one of the culprits but evidence about T.I. Parade was rejected by the Sessions Court as unbelievable. The identification of the accused before the court was about one year and eight months after the incident. The applicant is in custody since 2.3.2005. Thus, he has been in bail for more than two years after the arrest. Taking into consideration the nature of evidence and the period of sentence awarded and the fact that the applicant is in jail for more than two years and that there are no adverse antecedents against the present applicant, I find that bail may be granted to him pending the final hearing and disposal of appeal. 4. Pending the final hearing and disposal of the appeal, the applicant be released on his executing P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- with 3 one surety in the like amount subject to his depositing the find amount. He shall also attend J.J. Marg Police Station once in every month till disposal of the appeal. (J.H. BHATIA, J.)