(1) CRI.APP. 4298.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4298 OF 2010 Shivkumar S/o Tanaji Gaikwad, Age : 30 years, Occu.: Nil, R/o Ayodhya Nagar, Beed, Tq. and Dist. Beed .. Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Inspector, Police Station, Ambad, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna (Copy to be served on A.P.P. High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) .. Respondent ... Mr. S.S. Thombre, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. N.H. Borade, APP for the respondent-State ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 23RD NOVEMBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. The Application is for bail. 2. The contention of the learned Advocate for the applicant is that the applicant suffers from fits and requires medical treatment. It is argued that the applicant is falsely implicated and the story of the prosecution is improbable because for (2) CRI.APP. 4298.2010 paltry sum of Rs.2000/-, the road robbery could not have been committed by the applicant and other accused persons. 3. What appears from the FIR and the relevant papers is that informant Sayed Shakil was assigned the work of distribution of daily wages to the labours by the contractor, namely Hafiz Khan. It appears that while he was standing near corner of hotel Kalyani, one while coloured Indica car vehicle stopped there. It is alleged that five persons alighted from the car vehicle. They were armed with knives. They threatened the informant and his colleague by name Shaikh Irfan at point of knife to hand over the cash amount. They were also injured during the course of assault mounted by the applicant and other co-accused persons. The road robbers took away amount of Rs.2000/- which was with the informant for distribution of the wages to the labours. The car vehicle was intercepted on the way and the applicant alongwith others came to be arrested. The recovery was also made immediately. (3) CRI.APP. 4298.2010 4. There appears prima facie evidence to infer that the applicant is guilty of serious offence of the road robbery and there is hardly any material to infer absence of the likelihood of such incident. It appears no doubt that the applicant is in need of medical treatment, but due care seems to have been taken by the Court of Sessions while dismissing his Application by directing the Superintendent of Central Prison, Aurangabad to provide better treatment of a neurologist to the applicant. 5. In this view of the matter, the Application deserves to be dismissed since the offence alleged against the applicant is of serious nature and his involvement is prima facie explicit from the record. The Application is therefore dismissed. The observations made in this order be not considered while deciding any other matter on merits. Sd/- [V. R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp