Judgment The applicant seeks to be released on bail in crime No.256 of 2011 registered with Haveli Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 452 r/w. Sections 34 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the F.I.R. and other investigation papers filed with the charge-sheet. 3. The offence was registered on a report lodged by one Anamika, who claims to be the wife of deceased Shridhar Khandave. It appears that she was living with deceased Shridhar. As per the F.I.R., deceased Shridhar was having some physical relations with the applicant, who is eunuch, and the applicant was insisting Shridhar to marry her which he refused. The applicant used to threaten Shridhar as well as the first informant Anamika on mobile. On 03.05.2011 in the evening or so, the applicant had threatened said Anamika on mobile. At about 11.45 p.m., Shridhar came back and Anamika told him about the threats. Therefore, Shridhar contacted the applicant on mobile and abused her. As soon as the call was finished, bell on the door rang. Anamika opened the door and two persons entered the room. One of them was armed with wooden rod and he immediately began to assault Shridhar. Second person beat him with fist and kick-blows. According to her, they said that they were sent by the applicant Kiran @ Anuja to kill Shridhar. When Shridhar fell down with bleeding injuries, those two persons ran away. One more person, who was standing outside, also ran away. With the help of some persons, Anamika took Shridhar to hospital and got him admitted. He died on 09.05.2011. The post-mortem report reveals that he had suffered several injuries including injury on the head which proved to be fatal. 4. The wooden rod which was used as weapon of the offence was left at the spot by the assailants and it was seized by the police. One Amit Kumar Barkul was arrested on 15.05.2011. He is said to be one of the assailants. Another assailant is absconding. The applicant was arrested on 06.05.2011. The learned Counsel for the applicant pointed out that Anamika lodged a report of this incident about 22 hours after the incident. The incident had occurred at about 11.45 p.m. on 03.05.2011. One Amit Kumar Barkul was arrested on 15.05.2011. He is said to be one of the assailants. Another assailant is absconding. The applicant was arrested on 06.05.2011. The learned Counsel for the applicant pointed out that Anamika lodged a report of this incident about 22 hours after the incident. The incident had occurred at about 11.45 p.m. on 03.05.2011. Immediately Shridhar was taken to the hospital but she went to the police station and lodged report on 04.05.2011 at 22:10 hrs. There is no explanation for the delay. Except the statement of Anamika implicating the present applicant, there is no other material. Applicant was not present at the time of incident. The learned Counsel for the applicant also pointed out that Anamika had made three different statements, which show that she was living with different persons from time to time and that deceased Shridhar was also having physical contacts with several persons including Anamika and wife of his friend Nikhil. He was also having similar contacts with the applicant. The learned Counsel contends that Anamika is not a reliable witness and in view of the unexplained delay in lodging the report making allegations against the present applicant, the present applicant deserves to be granted bail. 5. It appears that the case has not been properly investigated. As per the F.I.R., Anamika was the only eyewitness and the assailants were unknown persons. She had given descriptions of the assailants. However, Investigating Officer P.S.I. Ghadge of Haveli Police Station, who completed the investigation and filed the charge-sheet, did not bother to hold test identification parade for said Amit Kumar Barkul to find out whether he is the real assailant. It appears that the whole case is based only on the statement of Anamika and nothing else. 6. Taking into consideration the circumstances noted above, the applicant be released on his executing P.R. of Rs.30,000/-with one or two sureties in like amount with condition that he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. 7. The learned APP shall bring the above observations about the investigation by PSI Ghadge to the notice of the Superintendent of Police, Pune (Rural) for appropriate action.