1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4140 OF 2007 Prakash Madhavrao Chavan .. Applicant versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ... Mr.A.P. Mundargi i/b Swapna Kode for the applicant. Mr.Rajesh More APP for the State. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J DATED : 29th January 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard. 2. The applicant has been arrested and is in custody since 12th April 2007 in connection with the crime registered with Sarkarwada police station, Nashik under C.R. No.106 of 2007 punishable u/s.302 and 307 of the IPC. The prosecution case in short is that the applicant who was working as a peon in 2 Nashik Municipal Corporation was being teased in the past by the victim Mr.Parvate. On 12th April 2007, when the applicant and Parvate came in front of each other in the corridor, the deceased again teased him whereupon the applicant took out a knife and inflicted on him several blows with the knife. Mr.Motilal Gadve, the complainant, who is another peon went to ward off the deceased from the attack. The applicant also assaulted the complainant with the knife on the face and he suffered incised wound on the face. Three other eye witnesses watched the incident beside the complainant. Each of the eye witness has stated about the assault. Thus, there is a prima evidence showing the culpability of the applicant in the crime. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the assault was caused on account of the teasing by the deceased for the past several days and even on the day of asault. The assault was therefore made out of grave and sudden provocation and would only amount to culpable homicide and not amounting to murder. It is for the trial Judge to consider the nature of the offence. There is an evidence about the assault. Prima facie, the applicant was carrying a knife with him when he was teased, which prima facie shows a prior preparation militating against 3 the theory of grave and sudden provocation. Further, there appears to be no apparent reason for assaulting the complainant Mr.Gadve who had gone there for rescuing the deceased from the attack. 4. The offence charged against the applicant is punishable with death and/or Imprisonment for life so far as the deceased is concerned and punishable with life or imprisonment upto 10 years so far as complainant is concerned. Taking into consideration the gravity of the offence and prima facie culpability of the applicant, in my view, the applicant is not entitled to bail at this stage. Hence, the application is rejected. 5. It is clarified that all observations made herein are only prima facie and for the purpose of considering the bail application. The Sessions Judge, at the time of trial, would decide the case on its merits and without being in any way influenced on any of the observations made herein. (D.G. KARNIK, J)