1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 242 OF 2009 Madhav Sampatrao Surve .... Applicant. V/s State of Maharashtra ..... Respondent. ------ Mr. S. Patil with Mr. Kedar with Kedar J. Patil for the applicant. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. ------ CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 22nd January, 2009 P.C:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. A complaint has been filed against the present applicant for the offence punishable under sections 395, 397 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is alleged that the applicant alongwith others snatched the gold chain from the neck of the complainant and the co-accused snatched away the golden ring from the complainant and also assaulted him with iron rod and the other accused gave fist blows and kick blows to the complainant. It is submitted by the Counsel for the applicant that the co-accused Amol Jadhav had filed a complaint on 2 11/1/2009 at 1.45 p.m., alleging that four persons had damaged the property in his shop and, as a counter- blast, at 5.30 p.m. this false complaint has been filed against him. It is submitted that the co-accused Amol Jadhav in this case has been granted anticipatory bail. Therefore, on parity, this applicant may also be granted anticipatory bail. This submission cannot be accepted. Perusal of the complaint discloses that the complainant was grievously injured as a result of assault by this applicant on him with the iron rod. No case is therefore made out for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. Application for anticipatory bail is accordingly rejected. Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations made by this Court in this order while deciding this application for anticipatory bail as they are made for the purpose of rejecting this application. (V.M. KANADE, J.)