1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 30 OF 2010 Shravan Rama Patil and ors. ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. Mr.A.P.Mundergi, Sr.Advocate i/by Jayant Baddeskar for the Applicant. Mr. Nitin Pradhan i/by Ms. N.N.Patil for the original complainant. Mrs. M.H.Mhatre, APP. For the State. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 21st April, 2010 PC : 1 Heard both sides and the Advocate for the original complainant. 2 This is an application for grant of bail. The applicants are shown as an accused in C.R.No. 275/2009 registered by Panvel City Police Station for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 326, 325, 324, 504, 143, 144, 147, 147, 149 of the I.P.C., under Section 4 and 25 of the 2 Arms Act and under Section 3(1) and 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The deceased is one Anil. There are eight injured persons including the complainant Deepak Patil. On perusal of the F.I.R., it is seen that all the three applicants are named in the FIR. The applicant No.1 is slightly on the different footing that he was admittedly present at the scene of offence before the mob gathered armed with dangerous weapons. It is the prosecution case that complainant and his brothers were returning to their village from Panvel in the car. They noticed that the applicants No. 1 and other accused were sitting on the road as their sons were playing cricket on the school playground. It is alleged that on seeing the complainant in the car coming, accused Sujit Patil spit towards the complainant. The complainant stopped the car and asked the reason for the said act. He started abusing the complainant. Thereafter 12 persons armed with dangerous weapons including the applicants 2 and 3 came to the spot and assaulted the complainant and 3 his group causing death of Deepak and grievous wounds to the persons of complainant s group who was shown as injured eye witness in this case. Two other persons have suffered simple wounds. It was contended on behalf of the complainant that two persons from party of the accused have suffered injuries, out of them one person has suffered grievous injury in the nature of fracture. Taking into account the medical certificates, prima facie, I find that even assuming for the sake of arguments that the complainant s party is said to be the aggressor party only less force was used by them. I am therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the applicants 2 and 3 as they have been roped in the aid of Section 149 of the IPC and there is recovery of weapons from them. 3 In so far as applicant No.1 is concerned, FIR itself indicates that he was present at the spot before the mob collected. FIR does not mention that he was armed with any weapon. But in the 4 supplementary statement of Deepak he stated that applicant No.1 was carrying gun. He has admittedly not used that gun. It is argued that he has not shared common object of the mob. I therefore, am inclined to grant bail to the applicant No.1 subject to stringent conditions. The learned APP submitted that both the parties are from the same village and if the bail is granted there is likely to be fresh tension in the village and there is possibility of tampering of witnesses. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts, I pass the following order. ORDER 1 Application of the applicant Nos. 2 and 3 is rejected. Application of the applicant No.1 is granted. 2 Pending his trial i. e. (Applicant No.1) in pursuance of C.R.No.275/2009 registered by Panvel City Police Station, the applicant No.1 will be released on bail in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one 5 surety in the like amount subject to the condition that he will stay outside the Panvel Taluka and prior to his release on bail he will furnish his fresh address to the Investigating Officer where he intends to stay and will report to the Police Station Officer in whose jurisdiction he will be residing once in a fortnight on every first and third Monday between 11-AM and 5-PM till the disposal of the trial. Bail is also granted on further condition that he will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and will not contact any of the witnesses and will remain present on all the dates of the trial unless exempted. Application is disposed off. 2 Parties to act on a copy of this order duly authenticated by the registry of this court. ( R.S. MOHITE, J.)