( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3396 OF 2010 1. Sarosh Shaikh Jameel, R/o 28, Bhawani Peth, Jalgaon. 2. Shoeb Shaikh Iqbal, R/o Aqsa Nagar, Mehrun, Jalgaon. 3. Javed Shah Hakim Shah, R/o Gendalal Mills, Jalgaon. APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .... Mr. Joydeep Chatterji, advocate for the applicants. Mr. V.G. Shelke, APP for the respondent/State. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 15th September, 2010] PER COURT : 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2. The applicants allege that they have been implicated by the complainant in the complaint without any participation of themselves in the alleged act of abduction of the complainant from his residential room. ( 2 ) 3. Heard learned advocate for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. The investigation papers were made available temporarily during course of the hearing, which have been perused. 4. Perusal of the investigation papers purports to show that the applicants accompanied Gaurav Vispute and other three (3) persons when they together went to the room of the complainant after midnight on 8th August, 2010. They called him out of the room after knocking the room fiercely. The complainant, who is a college student, was scared due to the bang of the door because he felt that those youngsters were likely to break open the door. No sooner he opened the door of the room, the applicants and their accomplices started beating him by means of kicks and fist blows. They abused him. They told him that in the elections of the college, he shall fetch the boy from Barhanpur and shall give votes to the organisation of "Ma Na Se" ( ). Thereafter, he was pulled by one Vinod Shinde and Ajit Shinde towards a car vehicle. He was forcibly put in the car vehicle and abducted. Thereafter, he was assaulted again and threatened that if he would tell anything to others, then he will be done to death. ( 3 ) 5. It is argued on behalf of the applicants that the applicants are young students and their arrest is not required for the purpose of effective investigation. It is argued by the learned advocate that the applicants did not participate in the act of abduction which is subsequent to the initial act of taking out the complainant from the room and, therefore, they cannot be attributed any ill-intention as such. I find it difficult to countenance the arguments of learned advocate for the applicants. First, one cannot be oblivious of the fact that the applicants alongwith three (3) students visited the room of the complainant after the midnight and knocked the door with such a force that he was frightened. As soon as he opened the door, the applicants started beating him. Their intention is clear from the utterances which are stated in the FIR. It appears that due to the elections of the Students' Council, the applicants alongwith their friends i.e. Vinod Shinde and Ajit Shinde wanted to terrorise the gullible students. The second part of the prosecution story is the part of same transaction and cannot be dis-associated from the earlier part of taking out the complainant from the room. It cannot be overlooked that now-a-days, indiscipline in the educational field is on increase. The young students are tempted to take law in their hands, even on occasion of the ( 4 ) elections of the Students' Council and, therefore, the atmosphere in the College campus or the University campus is polluted. This causes lot of harassment and trouble to the students who attend the College or the University for the purpose of studying and are not interested in the activities like the annual elections. The elections of the Students' Council should not be a breeding ground for futuristic uncultured political leadership. In this view of the matter, the application is destitute of substance and as such, is dismissed. 6. The observations made hereinabove be not considered in any other proceedings. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/criapln3396-10