SHYAMJIT MATAPRASAD YADAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD.

(2.) THE applicant seeks pre-arrest bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in respect of the offence registered against him with Virar police station under C.R. No.I-297 of 2007 punishable u/s.395, 143, 147, 149, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC and section 3(35) of the Arms Act.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the applicant stated that the entire story was concocted and was unbelievable. Inviting my attention to the decision of Ram Lakhan Vs. State of U.P. reported in AIR 1983 SC 352 and Lakshman Prasad Vs. State of Bihar reported in 1981 SC 1388 and contended that the case of dacoity was unbelievable. Both the decisions referred to by the learned counsel for the applicant are rendered in appeal arising out of final order after trial and not in connection with the bail or anticipatory bail. In my view, this is not the stage for marshalling in detail the entire evidence. Only prima facie case is to be seen. Suffice it to say that two independent eyewitnesses Mr. Santosh have stated about the assault to the applicant. One shopkeeper in the locality has also stated that about the assault and has also stated that he saw the applicant removing money from the pocket of the complainant. Thus there is a prima facie evidence showing the involvement of the applicant in the crime.