1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.678 OF 2010. NAZIRABI YUNUS KHAN PATHAN VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PSO PS RAM NAGAR, CHANDRAPUR. _________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri Parvez Mirza Advocate H/F Mr. R. J. Mirza Advocate for the applicant. Shri S.S. Doifode, APP for the State respondent. Coram : A.H. JOSHI, J. Date : 15th JUNE, 2010. 1. The applicant is one amongst the accused persons named in the Crime No.385 of 2006. 2. The FIR is lodged by Police Constable Sunil Gaurkar who is posted in Local Crime Branch, Chandrapur. It is stated in FIR that the accused along with 2, 3 persons were moving in a suspicious way at about 10 p.m. in the night. When the informant enquired with the applicant about reasons of their presence in said locality, who was one amongst these, one of the accused Razik assaulted a Police Constable Santosh Ambarkar accompanying the informant. The informant intervened to avoid the impact of assault, and he too suffered injury on his shoulder. The accused persons 2 ran away from the spot seeing the people rushing towards the scene of incident. 3. The applicant prays for bail on the ground that no specific acts are attributed to her and the application for anticipatory bail ought not to have been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, barely on the ground that the accused is absconding from the date of incident. 4. It is seen from the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge that there are various offences registered against present applicant. At this stage, though the injuries suffered by victims by themselves do not conclusively attract Section 307 of IPC, the version contained in the FIR and in the statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. that the informant intervened to prevent the injury to Santosh cannot be ignored. Moreover, it is also shown that the applicant is a habitual offender involved in crime various offences including under Section 307 of I.P.C. 5. At this stage, therefore, it will not be possible even prima facie to conclude that the applicant may not be involved in the commission of offence being a member of the group of accused who had assaulted the police constable Santosh Ambatkar. 3 6. In this background, the applicant is not entitled to discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. 7. Application is, therefore, rejected. Judge |mule|