1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3236 OF 2010 Tanhya S/o Hastmal Kale ..APPLICANT -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT ......... Mr. P.V. Barde holding for Mrs. M.S. Mhase, Advocate for applicant. Mr. V.D. Godbharale, A.P.P. for respondent. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 7th October, 2010. PER COURT : 1. This is an application for bail. 2. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant and the learned A.P.P. for State. 3. The F.I.R. purports to show that the daughter of informant-Sayyadlal Chavan was given in marriage to Santosh Kadhanya Bhosale and the daughter of said Kadhanya Bhosale was given in marriage to son of the informant i.e. Sayyadlal Chavan. The daughter-in-law of the informant was residing in her matrimonial home since about three years at village Kolgaon. The informant went to house of Kadhanya Bhosale on 15th February, 2009 at about 3 p.m. He noticed that said Kadhanya Bhosale and 2 the present applicant, who is his son-in-law, were present in the house. The informant urged to send his daughter-in-law, namely, Tarabai to the matrimonial home for residing together with his son. Thereupon, Kadhanya Bhosale and others demanded Rs. 2 Lacs. They started abusing and beating the informant. They detained the informant in the residential house after such incident. His daughter-Anita informed about detention of the informant to her brother on mobile phone. Therefore, on 3rd day i.e. 17th February, 2009, his son, by name, Kalindar reached the house of said Kadhanya Bhosale. He inquired with them why his father was detained in the house. Thereupon, said Kadhanya Bhosale, his sons and the present applicant assaulted him. It is alleged that Santosh Kadhanya Bhosale dealt blows of axe on the person of said Kalindar and he also was simultaneously assaulted by means of wooden sticks. 4. The learned Advocate would submit that the counter complaint was filed by the wife of Kadhanya Bhosale regarding the same incident. It was prior in time, and therefore, the false F.I.R. is lodged by informant-Sayyadlal Chavan. It is argued that the applicant is not attributed any particular role except that he had caught hold of Kalindar Chavan. Consequently, the learned Advocate urged to grant bail to the applicant. The learned A.P.P. 3 strongly opposes the bail application on the ground that two sons of Kadhanya Bhosale are absconding and the present applicant was also absconding for about one year and two months. It is argued that the applicant actively participated in the commission of alleged offences, and therefore, is not entitled to seek liberty. 5. At this juncture, it may be stated that bail is discretionary relief. The bail can be refused, if it is found that the accused is likely to jump the bail and may flee from course of justice. It is not necessary that the accused must be shown to be chief assailant in such case. It is true that main role is attributed to Santosh Bhosale, who is son of Kadhanya Bhosale, in the instant of assaulted mounted on Kalindar Chavan. It has come on record that Kalindar Chavan has died later on as a result of multiple injury sustained by him. What appears from the record is that said Kalindar Chavan visited the house of Kadhanya Bhosale in order to ask for explanation as to why his father i.e. informant-Sayadlal was detained in the house since about couple of days. It appears that the informant was wrongfully detained in the house of Kadhanya Bhosale by the latter with the help of his sons and the applicant. The recitals of the F.I.R. prima facie indicate that the applicant- accused assisted Kadhanya Bhosale and Santosh Bhosale during the course of incident of assault. He had caught the legs and 4 hands of deceased Kalindar Chavan before Santosh Kadhanya Bhosale dealt blows of axe on his person. Not only that there is evidence regarding active participation of the applicant in the commission of alleged offence but that his conduct is unfair. It appears that he was not found for about more than one year and two months after the incident. He eluded the arrest and moved from place to place. Obviously, there is material to show that if he is released on bail, it is likely that he may flee from the course of justice. 6. Under the circumstances, the application is dismissed. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/cri3236.10