1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.857 OF 2010 Mr.Ashok Nandu Shetty )..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra )..Respondent ---- W I T H CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1020 OF 2010 Mr.Krishna Somappa Shetty )..Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra )..Respondent ---- Mr.A.P. Mundargi Senior Advocate with A.M. Moorthy for the applicants. Smt.V. R. Bhonsale APP for the State. ---- Coram : R.S.MOHITE,J Date : 22nd March, 2010 PC 1 Both these applications are being disposed off by this common order as the applicants are shown as wanted accused in C.R.No.37 of 2010 registered by the Bhoiwada police station for alleged offences punishable under Sections 353, 341, 342, r/w 34 of IPC and section 6 of PITA. The applicant in Criminal Application No.857 of 2010 is the landlord of the building in which a restaurant by name Baywatch is situated. His wife Anita is the license holder of the said hotel. On an information received, the said hotel was raided by the police on 3.2.2010 after mid-night and 19 persons who were staff members as 2 well as 12 girls were rounded up. I have perused the investigation papers. It appears that the concerned girls have given two different statements, one of which is incriminating, whereas other is not incriminating. However, investigation indicates that the police have also recorded the statements of several other persons such as Artists who used to perform in the said hotel. The statements given by the said Artists suggest that apart from hoteling business there was other illegal activity which was going on in the hotel. The statements of several accused have also been recorded in which both these applicants are specifically named. One of the statement is of the Manager of the hotel by name Pradeep Shetty. His statement indicates that the entire business of the hotel was over-looked by Ashok Shetty and Krishna Shetty was one of the manager along with Raghunath Shetty. Taking an overall view of the matter, in my view, there are no special circumstances for granting anticipatory bail. Applications are therefore, rejected. It is however, made clear that any observations made in this order will not be considered by the Court while considering the application for grant of regular bail on behalf of these applicants as well as during the trial. Application disposed off. (R.S.MOHITE,J) 3 4