[1] IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1417 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.290 OF 2007 Pramod Suresh Kakade & Anr. .... Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Shri Abhaykumar Apte for the Applicants. Ms S.D. Shinde, APP, for the Respondent. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SRI R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR & SRI A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED: DATED: DATED: JANUARY 11, 2008 P.C: P.C: P.C: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicants and the learned APP. The contention in the application is that the injuries caused to the deceased on account of use of a hammer in terms of the medical examination were as described under serial Nos.7 and 10 of the post-mortem report and no other injury could be said to have been caused by the use of a hammer and it is the case of the prosecution that the applicant No.2 had used a hammer for assaulting the deceased. As regards the applicant No.1, the learned Advocate for the applicants seeks leave to withdraw the application for bail. 2. The conviction of the person who was prosecuted in the case in hand is under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of [2] the IPC. Being so, merely because the injuries caused to the deceased on account of use of a hammer is stated have not been the cause of the death, that itself cannot be a justification to absolve the applicant from the offence for which he has been punished. As no other ground is disclosed for grant of bail, there is absolutely no case for release of the applicant No.2 on the said ground. Needless to say that these observations are for the purpose of considering the bail application only. 3. While allowing the applicant to withdraw the application as regards the applicant No.1 is concerned, as no case is made out for grant of bail to the applicant No.2, the application is rejected and stands disposed of. (A.A. Sayed, J.) (R.M.S.Khandeparkar, J.) sjs/J8ca1417.7 sjs/J8ca1417.7 sjs/J8ca1417.7