:1:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 435 OF 2006

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 435 OF 2006

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 435 OF 2006

IN

IN

IN

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 320 OF 2006

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 320 OF 2006

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 320 OF 2006

1. Imtiyaz Ahmed @ Lakhu ]

Mohammed Israil Malik ]

]Applicants

2. Ayas Ahamad @ Pintu ](Ori.Accused

Israil Mailk ] No. 2 & 3)

versus

State of Maharashtra ..Respondents

Mr. S. V. Marwadi for the Applicants - Original

Accused Nos. 2 and 3.

Mr. P.A. Pol, APP for the Respondents - State.

CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, &

CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, &

CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, &

SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ.

SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ.

SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ.

DATE : 23RD APRIL, 2007.

DATE : 23RD APRIL, 2007.

DATE : 23RD APRIL, 2007.

P.C.

P.C.

P.C.

1. Heard Mr. Marwadi, learned counsel for the

applicants - original accused Nos. 2 and 3 and

learned APP for the State.

2. This is an application for bail by the

applicants - original accused Nos. 2 and 3 who have

been convicted for offence under Section 302 r/w.

:2:

34 of IPC and 235(2) of Cr.P.C. The name of the

deceased is Mohd. Hanif and the complainant is P.W.

1 Mohd. Rais I. Huq Ansari, brother of the

deceased.

3. There are two eyes witnesses to the

incident, complainant P.W. 1 Mohd. Rais I. Huq

Ansari and P.W. 8 Bilal Ahamd Ansari. FIR has been

lodged by P.W. 1 and in this regard, Mr. Marwadi

contended that no reliance can be placed on the

evidence of P.W. 8 Bilal Ahamd because even after

seeing the ghastly incident, he simply remained and

kept quiet for a period of 10 days and then his

statement came to be recorded. So far as P.W. 1

Mohd. Rais is concerned, Mr. Marwadi contended

that firstly, P.W. 1 Mohd. Rais has not stated

anything about direct participation of the

applicants - original accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the

assault, secondly, story narrated by the P.W. 1

Mohd. Rais was inconsistent with the story narrated

by P.W. 8 Bilal Ahamd, and, thirdly, it was

contended by Mr. Marwadi that no weapons were

recovered at the instance of applicants- original

accused Nos. 2 and 3 and even if clothes have been

recovered, they are not blood stained. He therefore

:3:

contended that because of these reasons the

applicants - original accused nos. 2 and 3 were

entitled for bail.

4. The learned APP on the other hand contended

that there were as many as eight injuries on the

person of the deceased Mohd. Hanif as per the

evidence of Doctor P.W