1 Cri.A.2008.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2008 OF 2011 1. Govardhan S/o Sadashiv Choudhari, 2. Yuvraj S/o Govardhan Choudhari, 3. Vikas S/o Govardhan Choudhari, 4. Tanaji S/o Madhukar Chaudhari, 5. Dhanaji S/o Madhukar Chaudhari, 6. Tai W/o Govardhan Chaudhari, 7. Changunabai W/o Madhukar Chaudhari, 8. Jaya W/o Tanaji Chaudhari, 9. Vanita W/o Dhanaji Chaudhari, All R/o Deogaon (Kh) Tq. Paranda, District Osmanabad. ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, ...RESPONDENT. ... Shri.S.B.Talekar, Advocate for Applicants. Shri.N.H.Borade, A.P.P. for Respondents. ... CORAM: T.V.NALAWADE, J. DATE : 30TH JUNE, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for anticipatory bail, in M.Crime No. 6 of 2011, registered with Paranda Police Station, Tq. Paranda, District Osmanabad (In Private Complaint Case No. 70 of 2011, Pending before the 2 Cri.A.2008.11 Judicial Magistrate F.C. Paranda, District Osmanbad). The crime is registered as by one order made by the Magistrate a private complaint is referred the matter for investigation under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Private complaint was filed by One Vishnu Ubale. The present complainant has appointed one Advocate to assist APP. Papers of investigation are made available by the APP. Both sides are heard. 2. It is case of Vishnu Ubale that he is owner of land admeasuring 60 R from Gut No. 77 situated at village Devgaon (kh), Tahsil Paranda, District Osmanabad and he has purchased this land in the year 2003. He has contended that present applicants have no concerned with this portion of the land. He has contended that he used to reside at Pune. He has made allegation that on 30.03.2011, after 7.00 p.m., applicants and others came to his field with weapons like sticks, Axe and chopper for harvesting Tur Crop, which was standing in the land of the complainant. He has contended that the witnesses named in the complaint were present and they tried to intervene, but they were assaulted by using weapons and entire Tur crop was harvested and taken away. It is case of the complainant that offence punishable under Sections 395 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code is committed by the applicants. 3 Cri.A.2008.11 3. For applicants some record is produced to show that to execute decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 173 of 1991, possession of the portion 2 H and 2 R land from Gut No.77 of village Deogaon came to be given to applicant No.1 on 11.03.2010. A copy of possession receipt is produced and there is copy of mutation Entry No. 348. There is copy of RTS proceeding filed with Additional Collector showing that mutation was challenged by the present complainant, but the said proceeding came to be dismissed. There is copy of application given by complainant in Civil Court for police protection. In that application, complainant had contended that when he had gone to his land on 22.12.2010 for harvesting Tur crop, he was prevented from harvesting crop by the present applicants. The Civil Court, however, refused to grant relief. 4. During argument it was submitted for the applicants that his portion is totally different than the portion of family of complainant. If different portion is given in possession of applicant-Govardhan, in that case there was no reason for complainant to challenge the mutation entry made in favour of the applicants. It is submitted that one more suit is filed by the present complainant, but the copy of the said suit is not produced. This Court is not expected to give any findings in respect of the civil dispute, but aforesaid circumstances show that there is civil dispute. When query 4 Cri.A.2008.11 was made to the advocate of the applicants, he admitted that there was Tur crop standing in the field of applicants and the crop came to be harvested in December, 2010. It is made clear that the applicants should co-operate investigating agency and they will have to give account of the crop harvested by them from Gut NO. 77. As there is aforesaid admission and there are aforesaid circumstances and as we are in end of June 2011, this Court holds that custodial interrogation is not necessary. Applicant Nos. 1 and 2, who appear to be main persons can be directed to attend Police Station. So application is allowed. (i) In case of arrest of the applicants, in in M. Crime No. 6 of 2011, registered with Paranda Police Station, Tq. Paranda, District Osmanabad (In Private Complaint Case No. 70 of 2011, which was filed before the Judicial Magistrate F.C. Paranda, District Osmanbad) all the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing PR and SB of Rs. 15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each, on condition that- (a) The applicants shall co-operate during the investigation. (b) Applicant Nos.(1) Govardhan S/o Sadashiv 5 Cri.A.2008.11 Choudhari and (2) Yuvraj Govardhan Chaudhari to attend the concerned Police Station on every Saturday and Sunday for a period of one month from today between 9.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon. (c) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses . Sd/- [ T.V.NALAWADE, J.] MTK