IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1315 OF 2009 1.Vasudev Laxman Patil 2.Rushikesh Yadneshwar Patil 3.Yadneshwar Narayan Patil ...Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent --- Shri Rahul S. Thakur for Applicant Shri S.S. Pednekar, APP for State ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED 25TH MARCH, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and the Learned APP for the State. 2. The Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with an offence which was registered with Taloja Police Station vide C.R. No. I-48 of 2007 under sections 147, 148, 395, 424, 453 of the Indian Penal Code and section 37 (1), 135 of the Bombay Police Act and section 25(1) of Arms Act. 3. A complaint was initially filed by the Applicants herein at 12 noon and, thereafter, the other complaint filed by the members of the other groups. It is alleged that on account of political rivalries there was a clash between the workers of two political parties. From the Applicants' group an application for anticipatory bail was filed in the Sessions Court by 37 persons. Anticipatory bail was granted to 34 persons. However, the application for anticipatory bail filed by the present Applicants was rejected. It is submitted that similarly, the application for anticipatory bail filed by the workers of the other political party. It is submitted that though this application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the Sessions Court on 16th March, 2007, they were not arrested by the police for last two years, though they are residing in the same village and are carrying on business and other usual activities. It is submitted that only after the election have been declared, the other group, who belongs to political party had instigated the police to arrest the present Applicants and, therefore, this application has been filed. 4. The learned APP for the State, on the other hand, submits that the station diary maintained by the police discloses that these persons were absconding and not traced. 5. It is difficult to accept the submission made by the learned APP for the State that for the two years these the Applicants who were residing in the said village and were carrying on their usual business would not be traced. It is obviously that the police have not been arrested the Applicants because their custodian interrogation is not necessary. The chargesshet has been filed so far other accused are concerned. The only allegation against the Applicants is that one of the Applicants was holding sword in his hand and gave a blow with that sword on the vehicles and other two Applicants had fired shots from their gun. In my view, this being the only allegation made against the present Applicants and for last two years the police have not taken any steps to arrest the present Applicants, custodian interrogation, therefore, in my view, is not necessary. The other Applicants have also been released on bail. The Sessions Court, in my view, is not justifying in rejecting the bail of these Applicants. The Sessions Court has also not taken into consideration the injuries which were received by these Applicants in the said incident and fact that the present Applicants had first lodged their complaint and, thereafter, the cross complaint has been filed. 6. The Applicants, in the event of their arrest in connection with C.R. No. I-48 of 007 for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 395, 424, 453 of the Indian Penal Code and section 37 (1), 135 of the Bombay Police Act and section 25(1) of Arms Act registered with Taloja Police Station be released on bail in a sum of Rs.5,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. The Applicants shall, however, report to Taloja Police Station for a period of four days from 30th March, 2009 between 11 a.m. & 5 p.m. and, thereafter once in a month. 7. Application is, accordingly, disposed of. V.M. KANADE J.