Ladda 1 aba-213-11.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 213 of 2011 Mari Raman Devendra ...Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent. ...... Mr Chaitanya Pendse, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr J.P.Kharge, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM: A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED:- 28th March 2011. P.C. 1. Heard rival submissions for sometime on this application preferred by the applicant for anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in the matter of C.R.No. 276 of 2010 registered on 18th September,2010 by Juhu Police Station, Mumbai. 2. Offences alleged against the applicant are punishable under Sections 323, 324, 326, 341, 504, 506 (II) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Apart from the present applicant, there are two Ladda 2 aba-213-11.doc more accused persons, who allegedly are involved with the present applicant for assault on the first informant and his brother on the night of 17th September, 2010. A specific case is made out against the present applicant as to use of a beer bottle for assaulting the complainant on his head. However, the complainant tried to ward off the assault and in that process sustained defence injury on his hand and fingers. There is also a penetrated wound injury on his palm. Role attributed to the co- accused, who are already released on anticipatory bail by the trial Sessions Court, was of holding an iron rod and assaulting and using fist blows to assault the complainant. It is argued that other co-accused were released on anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court. The case against the present applicant is to be viewed on the allegations mentioned against him in the present application and such allegations which are fortified by the medical papers which are produced today by the Investigating Officer. Apparently, there is an injury to the radial nerve causing a sort of immobilization. Though, it is vehemently argued on behalf of the applicant that the injuries sustained by the complainant are of simple nature and for which custodial interrogation is not necessary, in the opinion of this Court, there is a criminal antecedent as to lodging of another F.I.R. being No.172 of 2010 registered with same Juhu Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 324, Ladda 3 aba-213-11.doc 323, 504, 506 (II) read with Section 120-B of the I.P.C. 3. Considering the rival submissions and the role assigned to the present applicant and considering the criminal antecedent, it is not a fit case in which the discretionary relief of pre-arrest bail can be granted. Hence, present application is hereby dismissed and disposed of accordingly. (A.R.JOSHI, J.)