1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 2840 of 2009 Sheikh v. The State of Maharashtra -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr S.A. Jaiswal, Adv for applicant Mr A. Parihar, APP for State Coram: A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 9th September 2009 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 71/09 registered with Police Station, Ganeshpeth, Nagpur under Section 397 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Chandrakumar, watchman at Haj House reported that on 7.4.2009 at about 11.00 pm some unknown persons entered the premises of Haj House and they committed decoity of iron bars and rings worth Rs. 15,600/-. When the said watchman tried to intercept, one of the decoits dealt iron pipe blow on his left foot. 3. Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated. On the other hand, learned APP while opposing bail application there is sufficient material collected against applicant and weapons have also been recovered. 4. During the course of investigation, test identification parade was 2 conducted and first informant identified applicant as one of the robbers and assailant. A sword has also been seized from the applicant and vehicle viz. five-wheeler is also seized at the instance of applicant. Investigating Officer has also seized four bundles of iron bars and rings at the instance of applicant. It is thus obvious that applicant has played main role in commission of crime. It is also pointed out to me that antecedents of applicant are not clear. He had been prosecuted in nine cases which related to offences, inter-alia, under Sections 302, 307, 397 etc. of the Indian Penal Code. Preventive action has also been taken against applicant in four cases. Moreover, applicant was externed vide order dated 9.2.2007. Looking to the direct and strong circumstantial evidence collected against applicant and also looking to his character as history-sheeter, I am not inclined to grant bail. Application is rejected. Judge. hsj