1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1081 OF 2008 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1312 OF 2007 Ahsok Baban Shirke & Anr ..... Applicants. V/s The State of Maharashtra ...... Respondent. ----- Mr. S.I. Thakur for the applicants. Mr. P.A. Pole, APP for the State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE: 3rd October, 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants and the learned APP for the State. 2. Applicants are convicted by the Trial Court for an offence punishable under section 304 Part II read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. 2 3. Prosecution case is that the applicants assaulted deceased Ramdas on the back of his head with an iron pipe, as a result of which he became unconscious and later on died. 4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants has invited my attention to the statements of eye witnesses and submitted that the eye witnesses have stated that there was a scuffle between the parties which was going on quite for some. He also invited my attention to the opinion which was given by the doctor in his cross- examination that the injury which was found on the deceased could be caused due to a fall on the ground. He also pointed out that all the accused were injured in the incident and they had to be treated in the same hospital where the deceased was taken. The doctor has admitted that he had given treatment to all the injured accused for the injuries that they have suffered in the said scuffle. In the postmortem, the doctor has noticed that there were only two injuries on the person of the deceased Ramdas; one was on the occipital region of his head and the other was Contused Lacerated Wound. 5. The first application filed by the applicants was allowed to be withdrawn. Liberty, however, was granted to the applicants to file a separate application after six months. In view of the liberty given by this Court, this application has been preferred by the applicants. 6. Applicants were on bail during trial. No complaint has been received from the complainant or any other witness that the applicants tried to tamper with the evidence or threatened any of the witnesses. 3 Applicants are already behind bars since more than 10 months. Appeal is not likely to come up for hearing quite for some time. The defence raised by the applicants is a probable defence. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 7. Applicants be released on bail in the sum of Rs 10,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. They shall report to Wadner Bhairav Police Station, Taluka Chandwad, District Nashik, once in a month. 8. Application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)