- (1.) INTERLOCUTORY Application No. 225 of 2011 We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.
(2.) THE appellant before us is one of the two accused who has been charged and convicted for murder. THE prosecution case is that the main assailant, who is the appellant before us, had taken a second wife, who is the co-accused. He denied subsistence to his first wife(the deceased), whereupon the deceased told the accused that she would institute a case against him. Because of this motive, both the accused assaulted and murdered the first wife inside her house. THE close relatives of the deceased are witnesses. THE prayer for bail of the co-accused, who is the second wife of the appellant, has been rejected by a reasoned order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in her Criminal Appeal No.1620 of 2004. THE appellant before us is the main assailant. In view of the circumstances mentioned above including the reasons given by the Division Bench for rejecting the prayer for bail of the co-accused i.e. the second wife as well as recovery of the weapon, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of bail during the pendency of the appeal. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant is hereby rejected. However, the paper books of the case may be got prepared at the earliest and list this appeal for hearing immediately thereafter. Interlocutory Application No.225 of 2011 is accordingly rejected.;