{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3199 OF 2010 Ravindra Raosaheb Gadekar & others APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for the applicants Mr. K.S.Patil, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 12th August 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicants, who are partners of Daulat Communications, have approached this Court to release them on bail in connection with CR No.113/2010 registered with MIDC police Station, Ahmednagar, as the applicants are arrested on 2nd August 2010. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by learned APP. With the help of learned counsel for the parties, perused the papers of investigation. {2} 3. It is not disputed that Daulat Communication of which the applicants are the partners, had entered into an agreement with the Army Camp at Ahmednagar and under that agreement license was issued to the said firm to collect scrap material from the army firing range, Ahmednagar and to transport the same for disposal. It further appears that service of labour contractor Kolpe was engaged by the said firm, who was collecting local labours to collect the scrap material from the firing range. On 2nd July 2010 at about 4.00 p.m. while collecting the metal scrap material from firing range, one labour Ravi Telang got injured due to explosion. Immediately he was shifted to hospital where he was treated and discharged after four days. The concerned medical officer lodged a complaint in respect of the incident and on that basis, the said offence came to be registered against all the partners of the firm and the labour contractor. Other partners are released on bail by the lower court and as bail is refused to the present applicants, they are before this Court. 4. There is one clause in the agreement that remnant to be collected from the firing range after inspection by the expert from Army. Learned APP opposed the bail application citing the said clause that the same was violated by the applicants. 5. Though all the allegations disclosed in the complaint are accepted as it is yet, merely due to violation of the clause cannot be termed that the applicants have taken active part in the {3} said offence and hence their further detention is not necessary. Considering all these aspects, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. All the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each and on executing PR bonds in the like amount. Applicants are directed to attend the concerned police station as and when required for investigation, on written intimation from the IO concerned. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln3199-10