(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Criminal Application No. 3446 of 2011 1. Shakil s/o. Momin Chauhan, Age : 35 years, Occupation : Labour Work, R/o. Salvadgaon, Taluka : Paithan, District : Aurangabad. 2. Shabbas s/o. Momin Chauhan, Age : 33 years, Occupation : Labourer, R/o. as above. .. Applicants. versus The State of Maharashtra, Through Ambad Police Station, Ambad, District : Jalna. .. Respondent. ....................... Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. B.J. Sonawane, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent. ........................ (2) CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 17TH AUGUST 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard learned respective Counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicants seeking bail in connection with Crime No. 16/2010, registered with Police Station, Ambad (District : Jalna), for the offence punishable under Section 394 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of complaint lodged by Raju s/o. Bhimrao Chintamani, on 25-1-2010, in respect of occurrence of the incident on 24-1-2010. It is alleged that in the intervening night between 24-1-2010 and 25-1-2010, three unknown persons entered into the house of the complainant and assaulted him and stolen golden ornaments and one mobile of Nokia Company, totalling worth Rs. 24,000/-. The applicant no.1 came to be arrested after nine months i.e. on 1st September 2010, and one mobile of Nokia Company was recovered at the instance of applicant no.1. However, after arresting applicant no.2, nothing could be recovered from his (3) possession or at his instance. 4. Pertinently, contents of FIR disclose that when three unknown persons entered into the house of complainant & their faces were covered with muffler. However, after arrest of applicant no.1, identification parade was conducted in respect of applicant no.1 and the complainant identified him on 29-9-2010, and apparently, supplementary statement was recorded of the complainant on the same day, stating that while removing the money, he saw face of applicant no.1, and therefore, said identification parade comes under suspicion. Moreover, learned Counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have landed property / agricultural land and they are cultivating the same. 5. The investigation papers were made available by the learned APP for the perusal purpose, and after perusal of the investigation papers and contents of the FIR, and also considering submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties, and also considering facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that there is no propriety to keep the applicants in custody furthermore, since the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, and hence, the present application deserves to be allowed. (4) 6. In the result, present Criminal Application is allowed, and it is directed that the applicant no.1 Shakil s/o. Momin Chauhan, and applicant no.2 Shabbas s/o. Momin Chauhan, be released on bail, on their furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/-, each, and one surety in the like amount by each of them, on the conditions (i) applicant nos.1 and 2 shall give attendance twice in a week i.e. on Tuesday and Thursday, before the in-charge of the concerned Police Station, till disposal of the trial, and (ii) applicant nos.1 and 2 shall not influence upon prosecution witnesses and/or tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner, whatsoever, directly or indirectly. Present Criminal Application stands disposed of accordingly. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/ka3446