1 APPLN 5812 OF 2010 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5812 OF 2010. Rajneesh narayan Barve .. Applicant -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. Himanshu V. Pradhan, i/b Girish Kulkarni, for the Applicant. Mr. Y. M. Nakhawa, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 17th January, 2011 P.C. 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail by a person whose application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on the ground that the applicant failed to comply with the order of the Sessions Court, requiring the applicant to attend the police Station concerned. The applicant has filed on record document showing that the applicant was admitted in hospital from 26.11.2010 to 10.12.2010. Thus, the applicant had justification for not remaining present in the police station which the learned Additional Sessions Judge should have seen. Since learned Additional Sessions Judge, confirmed the bail granted to Mohmed Shakil Mohmed husain Tanwar, whose role is similar to that of applicant, the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail on the same terms. In view of 2 APPLN 5812 OF 2010 this, in the event of applicant’s arrest in CR No.I-345 of 2010, registered at Vartak Nagar Police Station, Thane, he be released on bail on his furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the aggregate sum of Rs.15,000/- on the following conditions : i) The applicant shall make himself available on 19.01.2011 at 11.00 a.m. for interrogation by Investigating Officer and thereafter as and when required Investigating Officer. ii) The applicant shall furnish his mobile number to the investigating Officer and the applicant may be informed the requirement of Investigating Officer on S.M.S. iii) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iv) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the trial Court. i) The order shall remain in force till the trial is over with the only stipulation that if chargesheeted the applicant may furnish fresh bonds before the trial Court in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Siddharam 3 APPLN 5812 OF 2010 Satlingappa Mhetre -vs- State of Maharashtra and ors, in S.L.P No.7615 of 2009. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)