1 A-868-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 868 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 207 OF 2010 Bharat Ananda Kumbhar ..Applicant /Appellant versus The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent Ms. Indu Verma – Advocate appointed for Applicant / Appellant. Mr. Y. S. Shinde – Additional Public Prosecutor for State – Respondent. CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND A. R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : SEPTEMBER 16, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant / appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent – State. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the instant case the prosecution has relied on the testimony of child witness. It is submitted that while considering the evidence of child witness, the trial court ought to have taken due care and caution. P.W. 2 Tushar at the relevant 2 A-868-10 time was only seven years of age and since he was staying with P.W. 1 who is the father of the deceased the possibility of tutoring cannot be ruled out. It is contended that the trial court also did not take into consideration the other circumstances brought on record by the prosecution in the right perspective, which has resulted in conviction of the applicant and in the circumstances of the case conviction is not sustainable in law. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the other hand has submitted that the evidence of P.W. 2 is cogent and free from contradiction and omissions much less the material one. It is contended that P.W. 2 has stated in his evidence that the applicant assaulted deceased (his mother) by weapon like knife. The Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the post mortem report shows that deceased sustained stab injuries hence the evidence of P. W. 2 has been corroborated by the medical evidence. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further contended that in the instant case there is a discovery under Section 27 made by the accused of the weapon of offence i.e. knife which had blood of ‘B’ Group. Similarly the blood detected on the clothes of the accused was also of ‘B’ Group, which was the blood group of the deceased. 4. Considered the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel for the 3 A-868-10 applicant / appellant and the Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent. 5. In the back-drop of the above referred evidence, we are of the view that the evidence of P.W. 2, eye witness, is corroborated by the medical evidence coupled with the other circumstances brought on record by the prosecution, no case is made out for grant of bail. Hence bail application is dismissed. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (A. R. JOSHI, J.)