*1* appa.226.11.apeal.131.11 kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.226 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.131 OF 2011 Sukhdev Ganga Khaire @ Don. ..Applicant/Accused No.1 -Versus- The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent ........... Mrs.Anjali Patil, for the Applicant/Accused No.1. Mr.H.J.Dedhia, APP, for the Respondent/State. .......... CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & A.M.THIPSAY, JJ. Date : 30th March, 2011. P.C. 1 We heard Mrs.Anjali Patil, learned counsel for the Applicant/ accused No.1 and Mr.Dedhia, learned APP for the State. 2 In Sessions Case No.708/2007, six accused came to be tried for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 302, 324, 326, 506(II) r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 11.01.2011, the accused Nos.1 and 2 came to be convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 324 r/w 149, 326 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused Nos.1, 2, 4, 5 & 6 have also been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 144 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 The accused Nos.1 and 2 have challenged the said order of conviction and sentence in Criminal Appeal No.131/2011 which has been admitted by us on 24.02.2011. This application filed by the accused *2* appa.226.11.apeal.131.11 No.1 prays for being released during the pendency of the said appeal. 4 As per the prosecution, the incident had occurred on 03.06.2007 at about 02:00 PM in the premises of the complainant party. It appears that both sides suffered injuries and Sessions Case No. 709/2007 resulted in acquittal of the complainant party. In Sessions Case No.708/2007, Vinod Tulsiram Bodke was one of the injured persons in the incident and he was shifted to Cooper Hospital with bleeding injuries. He was under treatment and on 08.06.2007 he succumbed to the injuries. 5 The prosecution case is based on the evidence of the eyewitnesses i.e. PW-1 Ravi Bodke, PW-2 Sukhadev Bodke and PW-3 Shanta Sonawane. In addition, four doctors i.e. PW-9 (Dr.Rahul Tekade), PW-10 (Dr.Ashfaq M. Ansari), PW-11 (Dr.Sunil Shinde) and PW-12 (Dr.Baban) came to be examined. PW-12 conducted the postmortem and recorded his opinion that Vinod died homicidal death on account of head injuries suffered by him. 6 It was submitted by Mrs.Patil, learned counsel for the Applicant, that even if the testimony of the eyewitnesses is considered and more particularly of PW-1 (Ravi Bodke) and PW-2 (Sukhadev Bodke), there is no specific role assigned to the Applicant during the incident and therefore, he deserves to be released on bail. 7 We have gone through the oral depositions of the eyewitnesses as well as the medical practitioners and we are satisfied that there is no case made out to suspend the order of sentence and release the Applicant (accused No.1) on bail during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No.131/2011. Hence, this application fails and is rejected. (A.M.THIPSAY, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)