1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4288 OF 2009 Bapusaheb s/o Jagannath Kapare & anr. ... APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri H.D. Deshmukh, Advocate for applicants Shri P.P.More, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATED : 6th April, 2010 PER COURT: 1. Heard Mr. H.D. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the applicants as well as heard Mr. P.P. More, learned A.P.P. for the respondent. 2. This is an application filed by the applicants, seeking anticipatory bail, apprehending their arrest under C.R. No.89/2009, registered at Newasa Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 325, 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 25(3) of Arms Act and Section 37(1)(3) and 135 of the Bombay Police Act. 3. It appears that, the offence was registered on the complaint filed by one Sachin Suresh Dinkar on 18.4.2009, alleging 2 that at about 10.00 p.m. on the said date, when he was proceeding from the area of Panchayat Samiti Gate, the applicants namely Bapu Kapare and Ajay Kapare and co-accused Anna Irale, who were armed with sticks and hockey sticks, came there from his behind and assaulted him on his head by the said sticks and hockey stocks and thereby he fell down, sustaining injuries. It is also alleged that, co-accused Anna Irale was armed with sword and he assaulted the victim by the said sword. It is further alleged that, the applicants and co-accused threatened the complainant to kill him. 4. On the aforesaid background, the learned counsel for the applicants invited my attention to the aspect that, the applicant had preferred application for anticipatory bail before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur and interim relief was granted in his favour therein on 5.5.2009, which was effective till 11.6.2009. It is also contended that, thereafter the applicants preferred the present application before this Court and interim relief was granted in their favour on 14.12.2009 and same is in subsistence till this date. The learned counsel for the applicants also submitted that, the applicants have cooperated in the investigation and the alleged sticks and hockey sticks have been already discovered and, therefore, it is urged that, there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicants. 3 5. Mr. P.P.More, learned A.P.P. canvassed that the third accused namely Anna Irale is absconding and the sword, by which the said co-accused Anna Irale assaulted the complainant, is yet to be recovered. Mr. P.P. More, learned A.P.P. confirmed the position that the sticks and hockey sticks by which the applicants herein were allegedly armed, have been already recovered. 6. On perusal of the investigation papers and after considering the rival submissions canvassed by both the learned respective counsel for the parties, it is apparent from the injury certificate that the alleged assault attributed to the applicants herein and the injury disclosed in the injury certificate of victim Sachin apparently co-relate with each other. However, it is submitted that the sticks and hockey sticks have been already recovered and, therefore, there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicants herein. 7. Besides that, the alleged offence is committed almost one year back i.e. on 18.4.2009 and the applicants were granted interim protection as mentioned hereinabove an,d therefore, I am of the view that the present application deserves to be allowed. 8. In the result, present application is allowed and interim protection granted in favour of applicants on 14.12.2009 is hereby confirmed and it is directed that, in the event of arrest of the 4 applicant Nos.1 and 2 in connection with C.R. No.89/2009, registered with Newasa Police Station, the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each and on executing P.R. bond in the like amount by each of them, on the condition that the applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when required and shall cooperate with the investigation and also on the condition that the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence upon the witnesses directly/ indirectly. 9. Needless to say that the observations made in this order are prima facie in nature and shall not come in way of any Court while deciding the matter on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) fmp/cri4288.09