1 (cri appln 745 of 2010) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.745 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 433 OF 2010 1. Chandrakant Krishna Jadhav 2. Sarjerao Dattatray Jadhav 3. Prakash Babasaheb Jadhav 4. Vijaykumar Babasaheb Jadhav 5. Sambhaji Chandrakant Jadhav 6. Ashok Pandurang Jadhav 7. Rajaram Shripati Jadhav 8. Sardar Shripati Jadhav 9. Raghunath Baburao Kadam 10.Sagar Raghunath Kadam 11.Sarjerao Krishna Patil 12.Vikas Shankar Jadhav 13.Bajirao Chandrakant Jadhav 14.Mansing Shripati Patil 15.Sevala Devappa Jadhav 16.Prakash Khandu Jadhav 17.Sivaji Vasant Jadhav 18.Yuvraj Ashok Jadhav ...Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ---- Mr.S.A. Ingawale for Applicants Mr. S.A. Shaikh -APP for State ---- 2 (cri appln 745 of 2010) CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATE : 13TH JULY, 2010 P.C. ---- 1. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants submits that he does not want to press application for bail in respect of the Original Accused Nos.1,3,4 and 11 i.e. Applicant Nos.1,3,4 and 11. He however, seeks liberty to file an application after expiry of six months. 2. Liberty as prayed is granted to the Applicants. 3. So far as the Applicants are concerned, they are convicted by the Trial Court for the offence punishable under sections 304 Part II, 326, 341 r/w.149, 144, 147, 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each and, in default, to suffer further R.I. for one month each. 4. It is submitted that so far as these accused are concerned, there is no material on record to indicate that they had assaulted the deceased Ananda. The allegations have been made even by the injured witnesses only against the Accused Nos.1,3,4 and 11. 5. The learned Counsel for the Original Complainant has vehemently opposed this application for bail. The proposal has been sent by the Government Pleader to the State Government for filing an appeal against the order of conviction against these accused for the offences punishable under section 304 3 (cri appln 745 of 2010) Part II. It is submitted that taking into consideration the injuries which were mentioned in the statement of PW-11 Dr. Sanjay Deshpande, there is a clear pre- meditated murder and, therefore, these Applicants have shared the common intention with others and are equally liable and therefore, it is not a fit case for grant of bail to the Applicants. 7. Admittedly, so far the State Government has not been filed an appeal against the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court. Further, the injured witnesses have been made allegations against the Accused Nos.1,3, 4 and 11 only. 8. Taking into consideration the said fact and also keeping in view the sentence awarded by the Sessions Court, the Applicants deserve to be released on bail. 9. All the Applicants except Applicant Nos.1,3,4 and 11, therefore, be released on bail on execution of P.R. Bond of Rs.5,000/- each with one or two sureties each in the like amount. The Applicants shall report to the concerned police station once in a month. 11. Parties to act on the authenticated copy of the order. 12. Application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)