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 CRI.APPLICATION NO.3312 OF 2008 CRI.APPLICATION NO.3312 OF 2008 CRI.APPLICATION NO.3312 OF 2008 Ramesh G.Chavan, .. Applicant Vs State of Maharashtra, .. Respondent Mr T.R.Patel, for the applicant. Mr K.V.Saste, APP for the respondent. WITH CRI.APPLICATION NO.3259 OF 2008 CRI.APPLICATION NO.3259 OF 2008 CRI.APPLICATION NO.3259 OF 2008 Baburao Deorao Chavan .. Applicant Vs State of Maharashtra, .. Respondent Mr A.P.Mundargi i/b Ms Bhakti Deshpande for the applicant. Mr K.V.Saste, APP for the respondent. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J. DATE : 15/10/2008 DATE : 15/10/2008 DATE : 15/10/2008 PC: PC: PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No. 167 of 2008 of Solapur Taluka police station, District-Solapur. The said crime has been registered against the applicants under section 328 read with section 34 of IPC and section 65 (f) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. It is on the allegations that on 16.8.2008 an information was received that the present applicants were in possession of molasses and were preparing country- liquor near the well of one Mr Sham Pardhi, within the limits of village Bakshi Hipparga. On receiving the information, the informant and the police party, consisting of 17 constables, went at the spot and at that time they saw the applicants, who were busy in preparing country-liquor, and the moment the applicants saw the police they fled from the scene of offence. The police were not knowing the applicants. It is the case of the prosecution that the informant identified the applicants as the persons who were busy in preparing country-liquor. The police have not recorded the statement of the informant. The applicant in criminal application no.3259 of 2008 has taken a defence of alibi stating that on the very same day he was in the hospital at Pune. Though I am not impressed with the defence of alibi, I am inclined to grant the anticipatory bail to the applicants for the following reasons: that the police have not recorded a statement of the person who claims that he had identified the applicants at the scene of offence and that the land, where the activity of preparing the country-liquor was in progress, does not belong to either of the applicants. Mr Saste, learned APP, on instructions, submits that there is no other material on record to connect the applicants with the alleged offence. Hence,the following order. 3. In the event of their arrest, the applicants to be enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs.35,000/- each, with one or two sureties to make up the said amount, on the condition that the applicants shall report to the concerned police station every day till 31.10.2008 between 10 and 11 am and thereafter on 1st and 3rd Saturday of every month for a period of 90 days or till filing of the chargesheet, whichever is earlier. 4. While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case without being influenced by the observations made in this order. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)