1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION Nos.1206, 1219 & 1191 OF 2008 IN APPEAL Nos. 1110, 1083 OF 2008 WITH APPEAL NOS. 1127 & 1130 OF 2008 Nawab Ansari Sarafat Hussain Ansari.......Applicant/Appellant versus The state of Maharashtra & ors....... Respondants. Mr. Ashok Mundarji Sr. adv. I/b Khan Abdul Wahab Khan for appellant ion Appeal no. 1110/08 & for Applicant in application No.1206/08 in appeal no. 1110/08. Mr. R.P. Paranj[e i/b KhanAbdul Wahab for applicant in application no. 1191/08 in appeal No.1083/08 Mr. Khan Abdul Wahab for appellant in appeal no. 1130/08. Mr. Baba Chitnis Sr. adv. I/b S.K. Sharif for appellant in appeal no.1127/08. Mr. Kamlesh Wadkar i/b Anjali Iyer for appellant in appeal no.1136/08 & applicant in application no.1219/08. Mr. A.S. Gadkari APP for State in all cases. CORAM: S. B. MHASE & R. V. MORE, JJ. DATED: 23rd OCTOBER, 2008. P.C.: 1. Accused nos.3 and 7 have filed bail application 2 no.1191/08, accused no.4 has filed bail application no.1219/08 and accused nos.6 and 8 have filed bail application 1206/08. Accused nos.1 and 5 have not filed separate application, who have made a prayer for bail in the appeal memo itself. Thus, we are considering the application for accused nos. 1, 3 to 8. The accused no.2 is dead during the trial. 2. We have gone through the evidence of the complainant and the eye witnesses and we find that both of them have stated that 5/6 persons came there and they were armed with iron bar, chopper, tube light etc. and one of them has inflicted injury to the deacesed and hit by hammer, who was that person, is not named by the witnesses. The eye witness stated that one single blow was given to the deceased as against that P.w.1 states that 5/6 persons had beaten the deceased. However, post mortem shows that there was only one injury. Therefore primafacie, we find that there is no cogent evidence to show the particular accused who had inflicted the injury to deceased, who succumbed to death. All the accused were on bail during the trial. Therefore we are inclined to grant bail. 3. It is brought to our notice that accused no.5 after grant of bail has absconded violating conditions of bail and he was required to be brought from Uttar Pradesh and therefore we will put him under stringent conditions of bail. The sentence of all the 3 accused is suspended under sec. 318. Accused nos. 1, 3,4,6,7 & 8 are hereby directed to be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety in the like amount. So far as the accused no.5 is concerned, he is directed to be released on bail of Rs. 50,000/- with one local surety in the like amount, He shall furnish particulars of the residence within the jurisdiction of Kurla police station at Bombay and shall attend the police station twice in a day i.e. 8 O' clock in the morning and 8 O' clock in the evening, till final disposal of appeal. (R.V. MORE,J) S. B. MHASE, J. 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL Nos. 1110 OF 2008 WITH APPEAL NOS. 1127 & 1130 OF 2008 Nawab Ansari Sarafat Hussain Ansari.......Applicant/Appellant versus The state of Maharashtra & ors....... Respondants. Mr. Ashok Mundarji Sr. adv. I/b Khan Abdul Wahab Khan for appellant ion Appeal no. 1110/08 & for Applicant in application No.1206/08 in appeal no. 1110/08. Mr. R.P. Paranj[e i/b KhanAbdul Wahab for applicant in application no. 1191/08 in appeal No.1083/08 Mr. Khan Abdul Wahab for appellant in appeal no. 1130/08. Mr. Baba Chitnis Sr. adv. I/b S.K. Sharif for appellant in appeal no.1127/08. Mr. Kamlesh Wadkar i/b Anjali Iyer for appellant in appeal no.1136/08 & applicant in application no.1219/08. Mr. A.S. Gadkari APP for State in all cases. CORAM: S. B. MHASE & R. V. MORE, JJ. DATED: 23rd OCTOBER, 2008. P.C.: Admit. (R.V. MORE, J.) (S.B.MHASE,J.)