IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1304 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1244 OF 2007 Kutubuddin Hasan Haju..... ...... Applicant. V/s The State of Maharashtra .. ...... ......Respondent. Mr.N.N.Gawanekar i/by Mr.Arfan Saith, Adv. For the Applicant. Mr.A.S.Shitole, APP For the respondent. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 22/1/08 PC: An appeal filed by the present applicant/original accused No.5 has been admitted. Heard. In all six accused were prosecuted for the offence punishable under sections 395, 421, 174 and 365 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 120B of Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution is that P.W4 who was working as office boy in Mohit Exim Private Limited was handed over a cheque for the sum of Rs.7,22,000/- on 29.9.04 by younger brother of the Proprietor drawn on Pratap Cooperative Bank and asked him to deposit the said amount in another branch of the said bank. One Sharad Saroj Singh had accompanied P.W.4 to the bank. Both of them had gone to the bank in an Indica Car and withdrew the cash 1 after presenting the cheque. Then they proceeded by the said car to Byculla. Because of parking problem they parked the car at Byculla and hired a taxi. While P.W.4 and Sharad were carrying the cash in a taxi which reached near Richard Sons & Crudas Company at the signal the driver stopped the taxi and two persons got in to the taxi. One sat by the side of the driver and the other at the rear seat. Those were accused Nos. 1 and 2. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 allegedly represented themselves to be CBI officers and showed their identity cards. The driver was asked to take U turn and take taxi to Byculla police station. As directed by accused Nos. 1 and 2 driver stopped the taxi near the Byculla bridge. At that time another taxi came from behind and one woman got down from the taxi. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 disclosed that said lady was their Boss. Said woman who is accused No.6 directed accused Nos. 1 and 2 to seize the cash. The woman took the bag containing the cash and left the scene of offence. 2. In the process of investigation accused no.5 was apprehended and on his disclosure 30 currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination were recovered and it is only this recovery of said currency notes which has formed the basis of conviction for the offence involved. The entire discussion in regard to the role attributed to accused No.5 is discussed in para 34 of the judgment of the Sessions Judge. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is absolutely nothing on record to indicate that the said 30 currency notes were drawn out of the money robbed by accused Nos.1, 2 and 6. The panch witness P.W.No.8 has turned hostile. The 2 submission is that at the most the applicant could be held to be guilty for possessing stolen property. However there is absolutely no evidence holding him guilty of commission of offence of robbery. Perused the judgment. In my view this is a fit case for grant of bail. The applicant was on bail during the trial. Learned public prosecutor submits that till the decision of the appeal the applicant be directed to attend J.J. Marg police station twice in a month. Having regard to the totality of facts and circumstances of the case I deem it appropriate to direct the applicant to be released on bail on same terms and conditions on which he was released during the trial on executing fresh bail bonds. The applicant shall attend the J.J.Marg police station on every first Saturday of the each month. Application stands disposed of on above terms. 22.1.08 3