1 criapln1315-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1315 OF 2011 1] Uttam Nagorao Hathiambire .. APPLICANTS Vs 1] The State of Maha. 2] Kishor Chandrakant Jadhav .. RESPONDENTS ... Shri A.A.Jagatkar,Adv. for applicant. Shri G.R.Ingole,APP for R-State. Shri A.L.Tikle,Adv.for R.2. ... CORAM : T.V.NALAWADE,J. DATE : 04/07/2011 ORAL ORDER: 1] This application is filed for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted in Criminal Application No.682/10 by Sessions Judge, Parbhani. The application is made on the ground that the applicant tried to tamper with prosecution witness-complainant. The other side has filed affidavit in reply. Both sides are heard. Today, some documents were also shown by the advocate of the applicant to the 2 criapln1315-11 Court. 2] The complainant had applied for taking measurement of his land and as his land was not measured in time and the applicant avoided to do his job, there was some dispute and then report came to be given against respondent. Crime is registered for offence punishable under Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes [Prevention of Atrocities] Act, 1989. 3] It is the case of the applicant that on 11/1/11, when he went again to the office of T.I.L.R., present respondent said to him that respondent had managed everybody including the public prosecutor. It is contended that respondent said that he can manage everybody and by saying so, he asked the complainant to withdraw the case and he also gave threat to involve falsely the complainant in a case for obstructing him in discharge of public duties. It is contended that the report came to be given on 11/1/11. Present proceedings came to be filed on 23/4/11. 4] The possibility that there was some talk between complainant and accused as the complainant is still required to visit the office cannot be ruled out but only from that circumstance, inference cannot be drawn that the respondent gave him threat and tried to tamper prosecution witnesses. Today, copy of report given against respondent 3 criapln1315-11 came to be produced by advocate of the applicant, which is taken on record, to show that the respondent is avoiding to do his duty and proposal is made to suspend him. If there is necessary material for taking such action with the department, the department will take such action on the basis of that material but relief granted by Sessions Court cannot be cancelled. So application stands rejected. [T.V.NALAWADE,J.] umg/criapln1315-11