BA-709-11.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.709 OF 2011 Surendra Jaynath Yadav ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Kalyan Taluka Police Station, Dist. Thane ... Respondent Mr. U.S.R. Singh for the Applicant. Mrs. R.V. Newton, APP, for the Respondent. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 27 TH JULY, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. With the assistance of the learned Advocate for the Applicant and the learned APP for the Respondent, I have glanced through the entire Charge- Sheet. 3. The Applicant is alleged to have murdered his own wife. The case against him is based on circumstantial evidence as well as the direct evidence. The direct evidence consists in the version of the Applicant’s own daughter. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that looking to the age of the BA-709-11.sxw 2 Dixit daughter, i.e. six years, and that she was with her maternal uncle, not much importance to that statement could be given. 4. In the view that I am taking, it is not necessary to examine the merits of the matter any further, except observing that the trial is likely to be over within a short time. This is because the Applicant is in custody since January, 2009. The learned Advocate for the Applicant is not aware of the stage of the trial, but appropriate directions can be given to the trial Court to expedite the same. 5. At this stage of the matter, when it appears that the trial can be expeditiously held and that it cannot be said that there is no suspicion against the Applicant, I am not inclined to release him on bail. 6. The Bail Application is rejected. 7. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and complete it within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. The trial Court shall report compliance to this Court. 8. Liberty to the Applicant to apply afresh for bail, should the trial be not over within that time. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]