:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2999 OF 2005, CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2999 OF 2005, CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2999 OF 2005, CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3000 OF 2005, CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3000 OF 2005, CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3000 OF 2005, AND AND AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3001 OF 2005. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3001 OF 2005. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3001 OF 2005. Bhaskar Keru Patil ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Shri. A.P.Mundargi with Shri. Suddatta Patil for the Applicant. Shri. K.V.Saste A.P.P. for the Respondent. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. CORAM : A. S. OKA, J. DATED : JUNE 30, 2005. DATED : JUNE 30, 2005. DATED : JUNE 30, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. As facts of all the three Applications for Anticipatory Bail and more or less identical reference is made to the facts of Criminal Application No.2999 of 2005. 2. Offence has been registered against the Applicant and others at Satara Taluka Police Station for commission of offences punishable under sections 285 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 7, and 8 of the Essential Commodities Act in connection with the Petroleum Product (Maintenance of Production, Storage and Supply) Order, 1999, The Maharashtra Nafta (Acquisition, Sales, Storage and Prevention of use in Automobiles) Licensing Order, :2: 2000, The M.S. Solvent Refinate and Slop, Licensing Order, 2000, Liquified Petroleum Gas (Restriction on using fixation of selling price) Order, 2000. The F.I.R. was lodged at the instance of P.S.I. of the Satara Taluka Police Station. A raid was effected on residential house of one Smt. Jaywanta Bajrang Nipane as police had received information that the Accused Eknath Bajarang Nipane and Navnath Bajrang Nipane had made illegal storage of highly inflammable petroleum products including solvent petroleum thinner. The Accused No.1 and 2 Eknath Bajrang Nipane and Navnath Bajrang Nipane were arrested on 24th March, 2005. Allegation of the prosecution is that the Accused used the said chemical as a petrol and sold it as a petrol for the use in vehicles. It is alleged by the prosecution that during the course of investigation it was revealed that there were other Accused involved . Accordingly, other accused were also arrested. The allegation is that the Applicant is also an Accused who was absconding. The case of the prosecution against the Applicant is based on the information revealed by the other Accused during the course of investigation. The allegation of the prosecution is that the Accused Nos.1 and 2 with the help of the Accused Nos.3 and 4 purchased the chemical from the Applicant. :3: 3. This Application came up before this Court on 5th May, 2005 when protection was granted in favour of the Applicant on condition of co-operating the Investigating Agency. Protection was extended on 06th May, 2005 which has been further extended from time to time. 4. The Investigating Officer has filed the reply in which it is alleged that after passing the order dated 5th May, 2005 the whereabouts of the Applicant could not be located. It is stated that the Applicant has not attended the Police Station for investigation. 5. Further affidavit is filed by the Applicant in which it is set out that after order dated 5th May, 2005 was passed by this Court, he visited Satara Taluka Police Station on five ocassions. It is alleged that on 15th June, 2005 Assistant Police Inspector Fatelal Nayakwadi himself visited the village of the Applicant, but, he did not call upon the Applicant to visit the Police Station. A case is made out that after ad-interim order was passed by this court, the Applicant furnished his residential address and telephone number to the Police Station. He also furnished the address of his site at Islampur. :4: On 12th June, 2005 and 21st June, 2005 he sent letters to Islampur Police Station to enquire where his presence was required for investigation and there was no reply. 6. The learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submitted that as of today there is no material available against the Applicant and it is obvious that the Accused who are already arrested have been shifting burden on other persons. The learned A.P.P. has opposed the Application by pointing out that the Applicant has never co-operated with the Investigating Agency. When attention of learned A.P.P. was invited to observation made by learned Sessions Judge while rejecting the Bail Application made by the Applicant that there are as many as thirty five similar cases in which there is possibility of the Applicant being arrested, the learned A.P.P. could not justify the correctness of the said observation. 7. The learned Sessions Judge rejected the Application by holding that the Applicant is made Accused who used to supply liquor to the different persons which is being used as a fuel. The learned Judge held that the Applicant appears to be a supplier of the product. :5: 8. Considering the affidavit filed by the Applicant on 24th June, 2005, it appears that the Applicant has shown willingness to co-operate with the Investigating Agency. There is no further affidavit filed by the State and especially, an affidavit of Assistant Police Inspector Fatelal Nayakwadi. As of today, there is no material placed on record to indicate the complicity of the Applicant and to justify the requirement of the custodial interrogation. All that the prosecution is saying is that the Accused who are arrested have named the Applicant. 9. Even in the first affidavit filed on 13th June, 2005, no material is set out against the Applicant. 10. Hence, in my view, case for grant of Anticipatory Bail is made out. Accordingly, all the three Applications deserve to be allowed subject to stringent conditions. 11. Hence, I pass the following order: : ORDER IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2999 OF 2005: : ORDER IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2999 OF 2005: : ORDER IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2999 OF 2005: i) In the event of the arrest of the Applicant in :6: connection with C.R.No.8 of 2005 of Satara Taluka Police Station, the Applicant shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount. ii) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the Applicant will attend the concerned Police Station for a period of eight days from Monday i.e. 4th July, 2005 from 10.00 a.m., to 2.00 p.m. and will co-operate with the Investigating Officer. Thereafter the Applicant will attend the concerned Police Station till the chargesheet is filed as and when called upon to do so. iii) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police offier/Investigating Agency. The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. iv Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of :7: opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. v) This order will enure to the benefit of the Applicant till the chargesheet is filed and thereafter, the Applicant will be free to make appropriate application before the appropriate Court. vi) Application is disposed of in above terms. vii) The parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3000 OF 2005: CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3000 OF 2005: CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3000 OF 2005: i) In the event of the arrest of the Applicant in connection with C.R.No.34 of 2005 of Satara City Police Station, the Applicant shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount. ii) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the Applicant will attend the concerned Police Station for a period of eight days from Monday i.e. 4th July, :8: 2005 from 10.00 a.m., to 2.00 p.m. and will co-operate with the Investigating Officer. Thereafter, the Applicant will attend the concerned Police Station till the chargesheet is filed as and when called upon to do so. iii) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer/Investigating Agency. The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. iv) Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. v) This order will enure to the benefit of the Applicant till the chargesheet is filed and thereafter, the Applicant will be free to make appropriate Application before the appropriate Court. vi) Application is disposed of in above terms. :9: vii) The parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3001 OF 2005. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3001 OF 2005. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3001 OF 2005. i) In the event of the arrest of the Applicant in connection with C.R.No.35 of 2005 of Satara City Police Station, the Applicant shall be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount. ii) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the Applicant will attend the concerned Police Station for a period of eight days from Monday i.e.4th July, 2005 from 10.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. and will co-operate with the Investigating Officer. Thereafter, the Applicant will attend the concerned police station till the chargesheet is filed as and when called upon to do so. iii) The Bail is granted subject to condition that the Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of accusation against him so :10: as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer/Investigating Agency. The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. iv) Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. v) This order will enure to the benefit of the Applicant till the chargesheet is filed and thereafter, the Applicant will be free to make appropriate Application before the appropriate court. vi) Application is disposed of in above terms. vii) The parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE