1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2094 OF 2010 1. Manohar S/o.Babarao Dhonde, Age-42 years, Occu-Service, As Professor at Devgiri College, Aurangabad, R/o.Shevdi (BA), Ta.Loha, Presently r/o. Garkheda Parisar, Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad 2. Shivdas S/o.Babarao Dhonde, Age-52 years, Occu-Service, At Shivaji college, Nanded, R/o.Shevdi (BA), Tal.Loha, Presently residing at New Kotha Parisar, Nanded, Tal. And Dist. Nanded 3. Kailas S/o.Babarao Dhonde, Age-40 years, Occu-Service, R/o.Shevdi (BA), Tal.Loha, Dist. Nanded 4. Vaijnath S/o.Babarao Dhonde, Age-45 years, Occu-Service, R/o.Shevdi (BA), Tal.Loha, Dist. Nanded. 5. Somnath S/o.Babarao Dhonde, Age-30 years, Occu-Service, As Professor At All India, Shri.Shivaji Memorial Institute of Information Technology, Shivaji Nagar, Pune, Presently residing at B-104, Kohinoor Village, Manjri-Solapur Road, Hadapsar, Pune APPLICANTS 2 VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through : The Police Inspector, Police Station, Sonkhed, Tal.Loha, Dist. Nanded RESPONDENT Mr.S.M.Godsay, learned counsel for applicants. Mr.P.P.More, learned APP for State Mr.B.G.Deshmukh, learned counsel for original complainant. CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 30/07/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.41/2010 registered in Sonkhed police station of Dist. Nanded for the offence punishable u/s. 395 of IPC. 2. When this application was initially moved on 09/06/2010, at that time, interim protection was granted in favour of these applicants, considering that there are cross complaints against each other. 3. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned APP for State, and learned counsel for original complainant. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3 4. Admittedly, crime came to be registered on the complaint of one Shaikh Husen about the incident which allegedly took place at his residence on 14/05/2010 at around 3.00 p.m. It is alleged that the persons, whose names are mentioned in para no.2 of the complaint, entered in his house, questioned him as to why he is not joining the party of applicant no.3 Kailas and on that count, abused him and his family members. Two persons whose names are specifically mentioned in the complaint, removed valuable articles and cash from the residential premises of the complainant. It is not under dispute that those two persons were arrested, they moved for bail before the lower court and bail was granted to them. 5. It is contended across the bar on behalf of these applicants that other than names of these persons in the complaint, there is no specific allegations against these applicants about the role played by them or any act committed by them. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicants that the applicants are serving at various places, and at the time of incident, they were present at their respective duty place. 6. On the last occasion, instructions were given to learned APP to collect the information about the documents annexed with the application, and according to him, the instructions are that those documents are genuine documents. 7. According to learned counsel for applicants, as names of these 4 applicants are appeared in the FIR, it is not to be inferred that they have participated in the crime. Mere presence at the spot of incident is not an offence under the IPC. 8. It is vehemently argued by the counsel for original complainant that these applicants are history sheeters and they had committed an offence, this Court is not in agreement with these submissions on the simple ground that, other than presence of these applicants at the time of incident, no overact is attributed in the complaint. Considering this aspect, a case is made out to enlarge the applicants on bail, hence order - O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. Interim protection earlier granted to these applicants is extended till filing of the charge sheet. 3. Applicants to co-operate the investigation agency whenever required. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JULY 2010/cri.appl.2094-10