AJN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.19 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.680 OF 2009 Siddarth Mukund Gade ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent Ms. Anjali Patil for the applicant. Mr. H.J. Dedhia, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : 19TH JANUARY, 2010. P.C.:- 1. The applicant is original accused 2. He was tried along with the other accused in Sessions Case No.152 of 2008 by the Court of Sessions for Greater Bombay for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the IPC”) on the allegation that on 12/6/2007, at about 10.00 p.m. in front of Tata Institute, Sion-Panvel Road, Mumbai, in AJN 2 furtherance of their common intention, they committed murder of Harish Chourasiya by assaulting him with knives, etc. 2. By judgment and order dated 28/5/2009, learned Sessions Judge convicted the applicant under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default, to undergo further SI for six months. The appeal preferred by the applicant has been admitted. This is an application for bail. 3. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant at some length and also learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. 4. The incident in question had taken place on 12/6/2007. The applicant along with the other accused was arrested on 20/11/2007. Identification parade was held as late as on 22/1/2008. No acceptable explanation AJN 3 is given as regards the delay in holding the identification parade. It is significant to note that the evidence of the identification parade has not impressed learned Sessions Judge. He has disbelieved the said evidence. Therefore, the alleged identification by the eye-witnesses in the identification parade will have to be prima facie kept out of consideration. In view of this, in our prima facie opinion, the vital link which could have connected the accused with the crime in question has been snapped. Learned Sessions Judge has also observed that weapons and clothes are seized after a lapse of about six months and since recovery of knife is from open place, no weightage can be given to this evidence. He has also observed that C.A. reports are not positive. Learned Sessions Judge has also come to the conclusion that the prosecution has not established the motive and has not proved that the accused were last seen with the deceased. Learned Sessions Judge has relied on subsequent conduct of the accused. It is the prosecution case that the applicant and the other accused went to AJN 4 Pune and stayed in a lodge and that on 13/6/2007 the applicant was treated for injury sustained by him. Prima facie, it is difficult to hold that on the remaining evidence of this nature, the applicant could be said to have murdered deceased Harish Chourasiya. We are informed by learned A.P.P. that so far as the present applicant is concerned, there are no antecedents. In the circumstances, in our opinion, the applicant ought to be released on bail. Hence, the following order : ORDER Applicant - Siddarth Mukund Gade is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one or two sureties to make up the amount. While on bail, the applicant shall attend the Trombay Police Station once in a month. However, if the applicant indulges in any illegal activity or breaches any of AJN 5 the bail conditions, the prosecution will be at liberty to get his bail cancelled. 5. Application is disposed of. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.]