1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1195 OF 2009 1] Somnath s/o Bhimji Satpute Age 22 yrs. Occu.: Education r/o Mohaniraj Nagar, Kopargaon, Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar 2] Ashok Chandrabhan Kamble, Age : 25 yrs., Occu.: Labour, R/o As above 3] Laxman S/o Chandrabhan Kamble, Age 27 yrs., Occu.: Labour, r/o Mohaniraj Nagar, Kopargaon Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar .. Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra (The copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) .. Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 925 OF 2009 1] Gangadhar Shankar Pote, Age : 55 yrs., Occu.: Labour 2] Sainath Balasaheb Kambale, Age : 22 yrs., Occu.: Labour 3] Ganesh Balasaheb Kambale, Age : 25 years, Occu.: Labour 4] Vishal S/o Gandharrao Pote, Age : 21 years, Occu.: Labour 2 5] Babasaheb Bhagwat Kambale, Age : 21 years, Occu.: Labour 6] Subhash Shankar Pote, Age : 42 years, Occu.: Labour All R/o Mohaniraj Nagar, Kopargaon, Tq. Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar .. Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station, Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar (Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) .. Respondent Mrs. U.P. Kale Wayal, Advocate for the Applicants in Cri. App. 1195 of 2009 Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate h/f. Mr. M.R. Jadhav, Advocate for the applicants in Cri. App. 925 of 2009 Mr. J.S. Gavane, APP for the Respondent-State CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 17th JUNE, 2009 ORAL ORDER:- 1] Both these applications can be decided by this common order:- 3 . In this case the applicants are seeking bail in crime no. 248 of 2008 of Kopargaon Police Station registered on 2.11.2008. The offences alleged against the present applicants and four others, are punishable under section 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 324, 537, 504, 506 IPC. r/w. Section 37 and 135 of the Bombay Police Act. 2] The prosecution case in short, can be stated as under:- . There was long standing enmity between the family of Dattatraya and the complainant. The incident occurred on 1.11.2008 at about 9:30 pm. The complainant and deceased Pralhad were walking towards house along a highway. When they came near hotel Sandeep, the applicants and other accused launched attack on them. All the applicants were seen, having sticks like cricket stumps and hockey sticks. The other two accused had iron rods in their hands. The complainant stated, that he was assaulted on his legs, hands and torso, whereas, he 4 stated the deceased Pralhad was attacked by other accused Suhas and Sandeep, who were armed with iron rods and who showered blows of their weapons on the head of Pralhad. Both the complainant and Pralhad fell down. Immediately the complainant's family members came to the spot and took both of them to hospital. Pralhad died on the next day. The complainant was found to have sustained one simple injury on his leg, but the post-mortem report shows that Pralhad sustained as many as four injuries on his head. All of them were serious, since they caused intra-cranial injuries to Pralhad. These head injuries caused his death within 24 hours. Accused Suhas and Sandeep it seems, caused fatal injuries on the head of the deceased. So their case can be separated from the case of the present applicants. There is no specific allegations against the present applicants that they had caused head injury to Pralhad. Though, it is generally stated that they showered blows of their weapons on the person of Pralhad as well as the complainant, the complainant clearly exaggerated the account of 5 the incident because, he stated he sustained number of blows on his person with iron rod etc. but the medical certificate shows only one simple injury to his leg. 3] Taking the exaggeration into account, in my view, the applicants deserve bail. The applicants are released on bail of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount. 4] Both the applications are disposed of. (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp/17june9/cr1195.09