1 1 1 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 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3997 OF 2008 Dilip Madhukar Thakur & Others .. Applicants. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr.S.B.Shetye with Mr.Niranjan Mogre for the applicants. Mr.J.P.Yagnik A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 26TH NOVEMBER, 2008. DATED : 26TH NOVEMBER, 2008. DATED : 26TH NOVEMBER, 2008. P.C.: . Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.I-320 of 2007 of Panvel Town police station. The said crime has been registered against the applicants and one another for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 395, 397, 435, 342 of IPC and sections 37(1), 135 of the Bombay Police Act. 3. It is alleged that on 16.8.2007 there was a Morcha (procession) taken out by Shiv Sena against SEZ at CIDCO, C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai. At the relevant time the complainant - Akbar Solkar, who was 2 2 2 working as Administrative Manager with S.P. Thakur and co. was present in the office. The company is owned by Parshuram Thakur, who, according to the prosecution, is an active member of the Congress Party. It is further alleged that about 150-200 people led by Shiv Sena activists entered the premises of the said company and ransacked their office and caused damage to their property. They also allegedly robbed certain amount from the drawer of the owner of the company and snatched gold chains and wrist watches of the employees. Only eight persons are named in the FIR. Out of the eight persons Jeevan Pandurang Gavand had applied for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court and his application was granted. In view thereof Mr.Shetye, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that there is absolutely no difference between the allegations against Jeevan Gavand and the present applicants. He submitted, the allegations against all the accused are same and in view thereof the applicants are also entitled for bail on parity. Mr.Yagnik, learned A.P.P. has not disputed the submissions advanced by Mr.Shetye insofar as the principle of parity is concerned. Keeping that in view and considering overall facts and circumstances of the case I am inclined to grant this application for anticipatory bail. Hence the following order: 3 3 3 . In the event of arrest, the applicants to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each with one or two sureties to make up the said amount subject to condition that the applicants shall report to the concerned police station on every Wednesday and Saturday between 7 and 8 pm for a period of one month and thereafter on every alternate Saturday between 7 and 8 pm till filing of the charge sheet. The application is disposed of. . 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.)