1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.135 OF 2011 Pramod alias Chochya B. Shelar ...Applicant. v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents. Mr. Pankaj D. Purway i/by Shri Subhash Hulyalkar ,advs. For the Applicant. Smt.G.P.Mulekar, APP For the Respondent/State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 8, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. Applicant seeks to be released on bail in crime no.265 of 2006 registered at Bhosari police station for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 386 of the I.P.C. with Arms Act and Bombay Police Act. As per the F.I.R. because of certain previous case, deceased Nandusheth, who was witness in previous murder case, was being terrorised not to give evidence in that case. Finally on 27.7.2003 at about 5.45 p.m., 8-10 persons armed with swords, sickles and other weapons came together and three of them namely Nitin Dhotre, Babu Patole and the applicant Chochya @ Pramod Shelar actually assaulted him with the swords and other weapons in their hands and Nandusheth was killed. The learned counsel 2 for the applicant contends that main witness against the present applicant has already turned hostile as the trial is going on. In fact, when the trial is in progress, it will not be in the interest of justice to grant bail to the present applicant, who was one of the three assailants. The learned counsel contends that some other accused persons have been granted bail, therefore on the principle of parity, applicant should be granted bail. I do not find any substance in this contention. Accused persons, who were granted bail were not actual assailants though they were armed with weapons. None of the remaining two assailants namely, Nitin Dhotre and Babu Patole is granted bail. In view of the above circumstances, application stands rejected. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)