1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4160 OF 2009 Firoz Khan Hakim Khan Pathan, Age-40 years, Occu-Agriculture, R/o.Bodhegaon, Tq.Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through P.S.I.,Shevgaon Police Station RESPONDENT Mr.N.B.Narwade, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.B.Patil, learned APP for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 08/01/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with CR No.109/2009 registered in Shevgaon Police Station of Dist. Ahmednagar for an alleged offence u/s. 141, 143, 147, 148, 149, 325, 326, 427 of IPC and Section 4,25 of The Arms Act and section 135 of The Mumbai Police Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. 2 3. Considering the submissions across the bar, advanced by both the sides in support of their contentions, it appears that there are counter complaints filed by the group of present applicant and on that basis, an offence CR No.110/2009 came to be registered. At the same time, the offence was registered against the applicant and his associates vide CR No.109/2009. Considering these counter allegations, on the earlier occasion, I have called the papers of investigation in both these CR’s. In CR No.109/2009, there is specific allegation that the applicant was holding sword in his hand and assaulted with sword on the person of the complainant Shitole. As against this, the similar type of allegations against this Shitole, who is accused in CR No.109/2009 which complaint was lodged by one Amol. On perusal of both the complaints as well as the papers of investigation, it appears that there is attack by one group on the other. In the premise, it is necessary to consider that which group is aggressive party. 4. During the course of submissions, it is urged across the bar that due to political rivalry out of the sand business, the applicant is falsely implicated in the present case. It is also urged across the bar that initially the applicant was protected by way of interim protection granted during the pendancy of this application which liberty he has not mis-used. In the premise, the interim protection granted be confirmed. Per contra, these submissions are vehemently opposed by learned APP appearing for State, as according to him the papers of investigation of CR No.109/2009 clearly indicate the involvement of 3 present applicant. 5. In the light of these submissions across the bar, perused the papers of investigation in both the CR’s. The injured witnesses in both the CR’s were referred for medical treatment. It is to be noted that the injuries sustained by the complainant in CR No.110/2009 are of simple nature and do not found any “incise wound” on the complainant in that crime. As against this, the injuries found on the person of the complainant in CR No.109/2009 are of grevious nature and those injuries were caused due to sharp cutting instrument. It is the allegation against the applicant, in the complaint subject matter of CR No.109/2009 that he was holding sword in his hand and with that weapon, he assaulted the complainant, which is corroborated by the medical certificate collected during the investigation of that crime, which is to be inferred that there can not be a false implication of the applicant in the said crime and the applicant’s party is aggressive party about the assault on the complainant in CR No.109/2009. No case is made out to exercise the discretion u/s. 438 of Cr.P.C. to grant anticipatory bail. Application sans any merit, and deserves following order : O R D E R 1. Application for anticipatory bail stands rejected. 2. Earlier protection granted stands vacated. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JAN 2010/cri.appl.4160-09