1 APPA 1466 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1466 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 194 OF 2010 Sanjay @ Choota Munna Thakur ...Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ----- Mr.Aniket Vagal for Applicants Mr.Rajesh More -APP for the State. ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 5th May, 2011 P.C. 1. This is a fourth application for bail filed by the Applicant. His first application for bail was rejected by this Court by order dated 12th April, 2010. Thereafter, he has filed two more applications. The second application was dismissed and the third application was withdrawn. Liberty, however, was granted to the Applicant to apply for bail in the event if the appeal which is pending in the Court, is not disposed of. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant that the Applicant has undergone more than 90% of the sentence which is awarded to him and he is otherwise would be released on 2 APPA 1466 of 2010 bail after completion of his sentence on 16th August, 2011. 3. The Applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 120-B r/w. 307 of the India Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and, in default, to suffer further R.I. for six months. He is also convicted for the offence punishable under section 5 r/w. 27(1) of the Arms Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and, in default, to suffer further R.I. for three months. He is also convicted for the offence punishable under section 3(1) (ii) and 3(2) of the MCOC Act, 1999 for which he is sentenced to suffer R.I. for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.5,00,000/- and, in default, to suffer further R.I. for one year. It is submitted that the Applicant has already undergone the sentence which is awarded to him for the offences under the MCOC Act and under the Arms Act. So far as the sentence under section 307 is concerned, the said sentence would be over by 16th August, 2011. The appeal which is filed by him is not assigned to this Court and, therefore, the appeal cannot be decided by this Court. 4. Since the Applicant has undergone more than 90% of the sentence, in my view, the Applicant deserves to be released on bail. Even on merits, the only 3 APPA 1466 of 2010 allegation against the Applicant was that he was seating in the auto-rickshaw along with two other persons and one of them got down from the rickshaw and fired a shot against the Complainant. Since this was the only material on record against him and in addition to that since the Applicant has undergone almost the entire sentence, in my view, it would be appropriate if he is released on bail. 5. The Applicant be released on bail on execution of P.R. Bond of Rs.5,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. The Applicant, however, shall report to the concerned police station twice in a month till the disposal of the appeal. Criminal Application for bail is, accordingly, disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (V.M. KANADE J.)